DERECHO DE FAMILIA (FAMILY LAW)

Argentina, 2006, 102 minutes, Colour.
Daniel Hendler, Julieta Diaz, Arturo Goetz, Damien Dreizik.
Directed by Daniel Burman.

This is a very positive film indeed, very enjoyable, very entertaining.

Daniel Burman brings Argentinian society to life – with a special angle since his family is Jewish and migrated to Argentina at the end of World War II. Family Law is somewhat autobiographical – and the hero’s little boy is played, charmingly and naturalistically, by Burman’s own son.

Family Law sounds far too legal and cold a title for this film. It opens with the central figure, a fairly buttoned-up type (literally since he even wears his suit and tie to bed sometimes) who lectures, quite interestingly in law and justice at the university. He is talking, not about himself, but his father’s daily routine in life and in his legal practice. He is in admiration of his father – and the audience grows in sharing this admiration. His father is a good man.

The hero himself is not such a bad man either, but overshadowed in his own mind and behaviour by this father. He marries, has a little boy, continues his work but fails to understand so much of his father’s life and attitudes, despite his father’s encouraging him to do so, until it is too late. Daniel Hendler won a Silver Bear in Berlin for Burman’s previous film. He is completely credible here as is Arturo Goetz as the father.

Burman is showing three generations of a family, relationships between fathers and sons. There are tensions and misunderstandings but also love and hope.

1.Entertaining Argentinian film? The Argentinian tradition, Latin America, the Jewish tradition in Argentina?

2.The title, audiences expecting a film about court cases, the film being about family, love and support? The true family law?

3.The Buenos Aires setting, the city itself, the cityscapes, the homes, offices, the streets? The musical score?

4.Perelman and his voice-over, his commentary about his father, the facts of his routine, the fifteen years? Perelman and his comments, his appreciation of his father as a good man, the differences between himself and his father, Perelman’s self-awareness and lack of self-awareness? His father as an enigma, a different kind of affection and love?

5.The father’s routine: his age, the same routine for fifteen years, his reliance on Norita as his assistant and giving him all the information? Waking, walking, the breakfast, the exact timetable, to the office, avoiding the queues, his seeing his clients in the office, at the bar for those who found offices difficult, his adaptation to every client that he met, knowing all about them, birthdays, football support? A genial and good man at the service of others?

6.Perelman and his contrast with himself, his not having an office with his father, his lectures? The nature of his lectures, the emphasis on justice? The student interrupting and denouncing him about ecology and his failing students? Perelman’s comments about the women eager in the morning and the bearded would-be dropouts in the evening? His discussing the nature of testimony and eyewitness? His focus on Sandra, his talking about his plan to marry her? Her dropping out? Her work with the Pilates system, his going for sessions, his awkwardness, hanging upside down, her helping him? The difficulty of her case, the copyright, his father helping him, winning the case? Marrying Sandra, the birth of Gaston? The details of their daily life, the effect on him?

7.Sandra and her work, her clients, the Pilates method? Her parenting? The expedition to Peru? Her love? The secrets?

8.Perelman and his life, his lectures? The final interruption and his being praised for teaching justice and being given the bouquet (and his giving it to Norita)? At home, sleeping in his suit? His being meticulous, his arm’s length and the ties and testing them? Tidy? The issue of the Swiss school? The birthday party, the entertainers, his having to be a clown? Going to the school meetings, the other parents, preparing for the concert? The swimming with the fathers and the children? The discussions with his father about Gaston, about his not liking soccer, about his being an artist? The intimate scenes with his son, the nature of true affection between father and son? The naturalness of the performances? His father, admiration for him, memories of the past, the lack of obvious affection? Yet his father reaching out to him, smiling, wanting to spend the day with him, taking him on the tour of the clients, meeting them – the radio announcer that he helped (and his presence at the funeral)? Perelman seeing his father with Norita? Knowing something was different, not knowing that his father was ill and about to die?

9.His being alone, playing with Gaston, the lights going out, Norita coming, the sad news? The funeral? The many tributes?

10.The effect of his father’s life on him? A pattern to model himself on?

11.The film’s themes of family love, values? An optimistic film? Not only feelgood but an encouragement to be good?

SOBHI DIGAR (ANOTHER MORNING)

Iran, 2006, 90 minutes, Colour.
Directed by Nasser Refaie.

Another Morning is a slow-moving and demanding film – but one which repays viewing. It is the portrait of a man who loses his wife, a grieving man who, from an ordinary way of life, working in an office, becomes almost immobilised in his grief.

However, the film was also a portrait of contemporary Teheran and Teheran society. The grieving man wanders throughout the city, a range of encounters with people, both rich and poor, who have an impact on his life. It also is an evocation of the range of life in Teheran. However, it is also a critique of the way of life, the social difficulties that are to be found in the city and in Teheran society: social issues of robbery, pick-pocketing boys, drug addiction, prostitution, women making advances, the observation of urban conflicts, university student debates, seeing the police in action, the sales of drugs on the streets, the sale of pornographic videos, newspapers and censorship.

The director, Nasser Raffaie, also wrote and directed the short but very effective film about girls going to school for their exams, The Exam.

1.The impact of the film? A portrait of a grieving man? A portrait of Teheran society as the man moves through it?

2.The film considered as an allegory of life in Iran at the beginning of the 21st century? The man grieving and almost sleepwalking through life? His interaction with all the crises in daily life?

3.The Teheran setting, the city, the highways, the houses, the streets? The cemetery? The offices? The blend of the old and the new? The musical score?

4.The title, its evocation of the humdrum and routine life of Kamali?

5.Kamali, middle-aged, ordinary, working in the office? The grief at the funeral? The family gathered round him, the old man and his weeping, the sympathy of the other members of the family? Their visiting the cemetery, gathering as a group around his wife’s grave? Their laments? Their coming to his house, his observing them later and not joining them? His finding their grief and their presence oppressive?

6.Kamali, going to work, his immediate boss in the office, their talk? The higher bosses? Their apologies for not coming to the funeral? Their sympathy for him, inviting him to meals, his standing in the background, trying to join in? The promotions of people at the office – and his not being promoted? His courtesy towards the other employees, his giving the lift home to the women, the attractive woman and her visit to the office – and his discovering that she was married? His continuing to do his routine?

7.Kamali at home, his having to cope, making his meals, cleaning the house, doing the washing and the machine breaking down? His going through the motions?

8.The nature of his grief, depression, his silence? His hardly speaking throughout the film? His weeping at home? Looking at his wife’s photo, getting out the older photo with her alive and laughing? His looking at the videos of the wedding? His finding her dress, putting it on the bed? The continued memories?

9.His going out and about, driving? His observing people? Not being able to help – the addict lying in the street, the woman that he didn’t give a lift to, the woman whose bag was snatched, his pursuing the cyclists and their mocking him, his not being able to go any further?

10.The audience watching daily life in Teheran through him? The Islamic republic and its surface respectability? Under the surface? The social issues of robbery, the boy pick-pocketing on the train, drug addiction, prostitution? The woman in his car and making advances? His observations of the urban conflicts, the student debates – and his running with the students to the bookshop and their repression? The drug deals on the streets, the man trying to sell him pornographic videos? The newspapers and censorship?

11.The issue of the lottery, his being tempted to buy the ticket, the pressure, his eventually buying the tickets – and his checking the numbers, his not winning anything?

12.How effective a portrait of a middle-aged man and his suffering the death of his wife, her memories, his grief? Trying to cope and finding it difficult?

13.How interesting a portrait of Iran from the inside, sympathy, critique?

OPAL DREAM

Australia/UK, 2005, 86 minutes, Colour,
Sapphire Boyce, Christian Byers, Vince Colosimo, Jacqueline Mc Kenzie, David Field, Robert Menzies, Nicholas Bell.
Directed by Peter Cattaneo.

Peter Cattaneo reached a career peak with the unexpected worldwide success of The Full Monty in 1997. His follow up film, the prison comedy, Lucky Break, was only moderately successful. Now he has gone to Australia for film the family film, Opal Dream, based on a story by Ben Rice, who also worked on the screenplay.

The unusual setting is the opal mining town in the west of New South Wales, Lightning Ridge, (but filmed in what is often referred to as a moonscape desert, Coober Pedy - referred to in the final credits as ‘Cooper Pedy’!). While these towns are generally genial, there is an underlying brutality (seen in The Adventures of Priscilla, Queen of the Desert). Here it is directed towards ‘Ratters’, those accused of going on to rival claims to search for opals. However, right triumphs here and the townspeople have to change their attitudes.

What brings this about in the first place is the imagination of Kylie Anne Williamson, played by Sapphire Boyce. Like many children, she has imaginary playmates. However, Pobby and Dignan are completely real to her – to the embarrassment of her brother, Ashmole (Christian Byers) and the concern of her parents (Vince Colosimo and Jacqueline McKenzie). When her father takes her brother to the dig, they forget about Pobby and Dignan and have to claim they lost them. She tearfully begs her father to go back and search, even on another claim. Dad is caught and branded a ratter, bashed by the men of the town and taken to court and prosecuted.

What Cattaneo has done very effectively is to make the film as he would do any drama, not gearing it particularly towards children or expectations of how children should react. This works well. Ashmole and Kelly Anne are more realistic and so is the treatment of the story. Children are on its wavelength and adults can appreciate it as well.

A group of Australian character actors, including David Field, Robert Menzies and Nicholas Bell, round out the cast of a satisfying family film.

1.A film for children and adults?

2.The treatment of the story as a film, not simply directed towards children? Its effect for children and for adults?

3.The Coober Pedy setting, the mines and the claims, the mounds and the desert, the town, isolated, modern, the house, the supermarket, the hall for the court, the cemetery?

4.The title, Ashmoll’s voice-over, the nature of dreams, hopes and imagination?

5.The credits and the beauty of the opal?

6.The Williamson family: the back-story, the mother looking at the photos, her love for Peter Sidebottom, his going to New York, Ashmoll’s comments about his being his father? Rex Sweeping his mother off her feet? Living in the city? The father as a dreamer, with rocks in his head according to Ashmoll? Moving to Coober Pedy, a year’s work, no luck? The claim, the explosion in the tunnel? The clashes with Sid, his viciousness? The mother, her friendship with Vera, working at the supermarket? The hard life, Ashmoll and his age, love for his father, admiration for him, sensible? Kelly- Anne and her frailty, living in her imagination, Pobby and Dignan? Her companions, talking to them, places at table?

7.The family coping? The interviews for the Miss Coober Pedy, the contrast with Vera’s daughter and her prepared speech? Kelly -Anne and her imaginary friends, on-stage? At home, Rex trying to cope, persuade her that they were not real? Ashmoll’s realistic reaction? Their tolerating the friends at the meal table, the set places? Rex taking Kelly- Anne to the mine, his coming back, saying that he had lost them? Her anxiety, persuading them to go back – going onto Sid’s claim and the consequences?

8.Kelly- Anne and her getting sicker, her persuading Ashmoll to go to search in the tunnel? His finding the opal? The doctor and his help, Kelly-Anne? to hospital? Asking Ashmoll to arrange the funeral? Ashmoll and his deal with Vera’s husband, giving the opal? Ashmoll working with his father, the explosion? His father being accused of a Ratter, the dead rat on Ashmoll’s bike, the kids laughing at him? His friendship with the lawyer and going to ask him to help?

9.Rex and his work, dreams? The mother and her coping? Helping Kelly- Anne? Sid and his charges, the bashing in the town? The mother and her losing her job at the supermarket?

10.The character of the doctor, his friendship, help for Kelly- Anne? The lawyer, his taking on the case, dressing up, performance in the court? Vera and her friendship, lollipops for Pobby and Dignan? Her husband and the funeral arrangements?

11.The court case, the lawyer, the prosecutor and his bias, interruptions? The judge and his being fair? Rex having to imitate his search, people laughing? Vera and the teacher and their testimony? The verdict, Ashmoll and his speech, the funeral?

12.The arrangements for the funeral, the coffins and the wreaths, no-one arriving, people turning up? The information on the news? The speech at the grave, the importance of the ritual? Kelly- Anne and her presence, getting better?

13.A portrait of family, the Australian ethos, the harsh aspects of life, the more genial aspects of life? A film for the family?

EN SOAP (A SOAP)

Denmark, 2005, 102 minutes, Colour.
Trine Dyrholm, David Dencik.
Directed by Pernille Fischer Christensen.

Soaps on TV are not like life. They are life heightened (or lowered depending on one’s point of view). We get some spoof sequences of TV soaps during this film. Perhaps, the director is saying that life is like a soap. However, in Denmark, life is much more serious than a soap even when, on paper, it might sound like one.

Almost confined to two apartments (with a now and again glimpse of blossoms outside the building), the film is not as claustrophobic as this might seem. That is because the two characters are strongly drawn, experience strange events and have to deal with their emotions.

One is the owner of a beauty parlour, Charlotte, who is, as they say, unlucky in love – very unlucky in fact, attracted to macho, brutal types. The other is the man downstairs whom she asks to help her out with a furniture shifting problem. The bigger problem is that he is a transsexual, Veronica, very lonely, acting sometimes as a prostitute, disowned by his father and visited in secret by his fussing mother.

The bonds of friendship grow between these two outsiders. When Veronica goes into suicidal depression, it is Charlotte who cares for her.

Brief, both comic and dour, but a sympathetic glimpse of people on the margin.

1.The title? The use of American soap operas in the background for Charlotte and Veronica watching? The kind of dialogue, situations, relationships? This film as a soap – or more serious? Especially in comparison with the soaps in the background?

2.A Danish film, a Danish attitude towards life, morals, sexuality – and transsexuals? Relationships, love, promiscuity, commitment?

3.The film remaining in two flats, the details of Charlotte’s flat, Veronica’s flat? The only outside scenes being the continual outside look at blossoms? The musical score?

4.The parallel stories of Charlotte and Veronica? The initial antagonism? The changes, each saving the other’s life? The friendship, the impossibility of love, help and dependence? A future for each? Alone and self-assertive?

5.Charlotte’s story: her age, seeing her with her beauty products, the voice-over narrative introducing the scenes? Charlotte and her breaking up with Kristian? Moving into the flat, ringing him to move the bed, his coming, his bewilderment? Her inviting him to be violent – and his later doing so? Settling in, quiet, alone? Asking Veronica to help? Veronica’s help, antagonism, refusal of a gift? Charlotte and her work, going down to see Veronica, the gradual friendship, discussions, the gift of the make-up? Hearing the dog, going down and finding Veronica with the overdose, ringing Kristian for advice, going to hospital? Going down, minding the dog, the mistake with the letter under the chair? The return, Veronica’s gratitude, her helping her? Advice, friendship, secret games, sexuality, infatuation? Her inviting Kristian over? Making up with him, getting Kristian to dance? The sexual encounter, the next morning, the possibility of moving back home? The apology to Veronica? The meeting between the two, the news about the letter, her telling Kristian she would not be returning? The secret for Veronica? Her being by herself – more self-assertive? The background of her relationships, her age, the men she brought home, their attitudes, friendly, callous, married, her rejection of them? Could she commit?

6.Veronica’s story: Ulrik and his relationship with his mother, his father ignoring him, refusing to let his mother visit? Her love for her son, acceptance of his lifestyle, bringing him food? His strong statement about getting her to tell his father the truth or else she couldn’t come? His transvestite lifestyle, Miss Daisy? His clients and their gross behaviour? Helping Charlotte, his resentment? His despair, taking the overdose? His gratitude to Charlotte for helping him live? His friendship, the discussions, making her curtains? The secrets? The possibility of a relationship? His anger with Kristian and punching him? Kristian’s later apology? The news about the operation, his telling his mother, telling Charlotte, their discussions about the reality of what would happen? A future for him?

7.Kristian, the shock of Charlotte’s leaving him, his being a doctor? His arguing with her, his giving advice about the overdose? Her bringing him back, his violence against her, her making him dance, the sexual encounter, the possibility of reuniting? Charlotte abandoning him?

8.Veronica’s mother, her love for her son, bringing him gifts, the short visits, the talk, the gift for his father, her anxiety about his father? The talk with Charlotte, persuading her to look after her son?

9.The soap-opera style – but more serious in the Scandinavian way? The voice-over with the introduction of each chapter, the summary of what happened to the characters, the black and white photography?

SYRIANA

US, 2005, 126 minutes, Colour.
George Clooney, Matt Damon, Jeffrey Wright, Chris Cooper, Christopher Plummer, Amanda Peet, Nicky Henson, Mark Strong, Jamie Sheridan.
Directed by Stephen Gaghan.

A very interesting and topical film.

A word of reviewer warning first. The plot of Syriana is extremely complex, quite a number of different strands which require full concentration. This is made even more demanding because the screenplay moves very swiftly from one strand to another, often brief scenes of drama and reporting. In fact, the locations for the film are varied. In the US, we are in Washington, Baltimore and at a hunting park in Texas. In Europe, the central action is in Geneva but also in a luxury resort in Spain. In the middle East, the film opens in Iran, moves to the oil fields of the Gulf and then to Lebanon.

And the film is up-to-date topical. While it was made in 2004, many of the references and difficulties have not changed. The role of the sheikhs and their relationships with the US government reminds us of what Michael Moore alleged in Fahrenheit 911 about the Bushes and Saudi families. The discussions about Iran and its nuclear ambitions are there as well as an American association for the liberation of Iran, peopled by wealthy businessmen. With its portrayal of the recruiting and training (and religious brainwashing) of young men prepared to kill themselves (as witnessed in their videoed testaments), audiences can get some grasp on the reasons for insurgencies.

In the United States itself, the Enron scandals, bankruptcy and current trials are obviously mirrored in a significant part of Syriana. A legal bureaucrat (Jeffrey Wright) is commissioned to investigate the background to oil company mergers, to get evidence of bribes and corruption and to deliver top-level names as scapegoats for prosecution. (The recent, Oscar-nominated documentary, Enron: The Smartest Men in the Room is well worth seeing, an illuminating portrait of greed, gamble and mismanagement.)

The background of American espionage and agents also comes to the fore, especially the activities of the CIA which are morally appalling, executions of foreign powers who are disapproved of because of their alleged hostility to US interests. Most of us can seem politically naïve and trusting of powers that be. Syriana gives plausible fictional grounds (though referenced to fact) for all kinds of conspiracy theories.

George Clooney’s Good Night and Good Luck, with its critique of McCarthyism? and the unscrupulous vilification of citizens by uncontrolled authoritarian senators and committees, has received many Oscar-nominations including Best Film. Clooney is behind Syriana as producer and also as star (with another Oscar nomination for Best Supporting Actor). Clooney is establishing himself as a media personality who can influence political opinion through his films.

He plays a veteran agent who has been involved in arms deals, abductions and infiltrating Hezbollah. Now, he has spoken his mind and authorities distance themselves from him, spreading slanderous rumours to destroy his credibility. Tycoon Christopher Plummer reminds him at the end that he has been used for decades and did not ask the reasons behind what was ordered. Times have changed and there is a need to question.

The other leading player is Matt Damon as a young family man in Geneva, a prominent financial adviser. When tragedy strikes his family, he is offered an opportunity to be counsellor to a reforming Gulf prince (not approved of by the US government). He is so caught up in this world of power and wealth that he is prepared to sacrifice family. Until tragedy strikes again.

Director Stephen Gaghan wrote the Oscar-winning Traffic. Obviously, he is fascinated by American politics and issues of justice. For those who are willing to keep attentive to his film, he offers opportunity for audiences to share this fascination.

1.An American film with liberal point of view in 2005? Political implications, economic, foreign affairs, globalisation, espionage agencies?

2.Audience response to the film, from the political perspectives, right-wing, left-wing? George Clooney and his production, an American look at the Arab world, the oil world etc?

3.The scope of the film: oil companies and globalisation, oil and the Gulf, Lebanon and its history, the CIA, the Arab world, suicide bombers?

4.The structure of the film: bits and pieces, the continual accumulation of information, brief reports on the particular strands of the plot, the building up of the interconnections, a jigsaw puzzle? The need for audience attention?

5.Positive response to the film, the critique of the US, of oil companies, of Arab countries? Negative responses for the critique of the US? The cynicism in the film – ultimately positive or negative?

6.Location photography: the United States, Washington, DC, the suburbs of Baltimore, Texas and the hunt? Geneva, affluent Spain, Beirut, the oilfields of the Gulf, the desert, the wharves for the distribution of oil? Building a world picture? The atmosphere of the musical score?

7.The opening and the image of Teheran? The references to Iran, arms deals, terrorists, the CIA toppling regimes, establishing the regime in Iran in the 50s and 60s? The Arabs and the Arab countries? Suicide bombers? Migrant workers? Labour? The history of the Middle East? Oil in Kazakhstan? China and its involvement? The possibility of reform and democracy in Iran – and the American Society for the Liberation of Iran? Boardroom deals and government approval (in the light of the history of the downfall and the prosecution of Enron)?

8.The opening in Teheran, the permissive life behind the scenes, the prostitute getting dressed in strict Iranian clothing? The world of the men? The gun deals, the dealers not speaking Farsi? The explosion – and Bob’s roll? Bob Barnes in Teheran, speaking Farsi? The arms deals? For the CIA? His work in Lebanon in the 80s, his infiltration of Hezbollah? Back in the US, his being briefed about giving the report, his opinions on Iran, to a Condoleezza Rice look-alike, not being accepted? The relationship with Fred and Jane, the boss of the department? His friendship with Stan, asking for permission to return to Beirut? His plan about the abduction of Nasir? Encountering him in the elevator – and its later being remembered? The encounter with Jimmy/Mazawi? The plan for the abduction of Nasir? His own abduction, the details of the torture, the fingernails? The emir coming and stopping the torture? The CIA discussions, closing the book on Bob, fabricating the story and the rumours? Bob and his attempt to infiltrate the computers, failing in access? Going to Freddie’s house? His being rejected? Meeting Stan at the cinema and getting the information? Whiting and the intrusion into his house, the discussion at the diner, his emotional blackmail? Getting his passport back? The return to the Gulf, driving the car, the white flag, wanting to warn Nasir? The CIA explosion? Whiting and his comment about his being used by the CIA? Bob’s comment about not needing to know in the past, needing to know in the present?

9.Bennett Holliday, his working for the company, the discussions with Whiting, the summons? His investigation, a wolf in sheep’s clothing? Sidney and the board meeting, the discussions about the merger? The film giving the information about the companies, their plans, oil expansion, the deals with China, the deals with the Middle East? The illegalities of aspects of the deals, the possibility of corruption? Bennett at the board meeting? The issue of Asia, Kazakhstan, the emir and his sympathy, Nasir and his hostility, the role of the Chinese? The documents and the investigation? Bennett and the team getting the documentation? His meeting with Don – and the need for a bigger fish for the government to have? The interludes with his father, his alcoholism, his attitude towards his father? Dalton, his interview on the television, his long speech about the necessity of corruption? Corruption for the safety of the US? The discussions with Jimmy Pope and the information given? With Leland Janus and Sidney, going to the function, Sidney exposed as having done illegal deals? At the dinner, the acclaim, going back home, inviting his father into the house?

10.Whiting, commanding, sinister? His background, the oil company, the exercise of power, summoning Bennett? The intruder in the house, going to meet Bob? The blackmail? His place in the mergers? At the banquet at the end? Surviving?

11.Sidney, friendship with Bennett, the deals, breaking the law? Dalton and the deals, his speech about corruption? Pope and his speeches to the board, his ranch in Texas, the discussions with Bennett? The personnel involved in the mergers? The interview with Janus, the downfall of Sidney? The function, the speeches, the acclaim, government approval of the merger?

12.The young lawyer and his financial advice? Seen with his family, his relationship with his wife, the breakfast with the two children? Playing with them? Genial? The Geneva base, his company, the television interviews? His assistants, the advice to go to Spain, taking the family? His not being able to see the emir, explaining to the underlings? The accident and the death of his son? The funeral? (And the attempts to control the lighting, the chlorination of the pool?) Nasir, his lack of tact, the price of his son’s death? His giving advice to Nasir, the good idea about the pipeline, his being hired? Sharing ideas with Nasir? His getting caught up in this world? His rejection of his wife? The separation? In the Gulf, in the car, the bomb exploding, his surviving? Returning to his wife and children – wiser?

13.Nasir and his relationship with his father, power and wealth, the lifestyle of the sheikhs, wasting the money, the history of the 19th century, the oil wealth, the possibility of oil running out and their returning to a more barbaric state? The American pressures on the emir, his abdication, naming his worthless son? Because of his friendship with the Americans? The spendthrift son, at the end and his being acclaimed at the function?

14.Nasir, his power, education in England and America, relationship with his father, negotiating the deals with the Chinese, his reaction to the boy’s death? Hiring the financial adviser, listening to him? His vision for the Middle East, for democracy, for women? Not in collaboration with the United States (and the point made about five percent of the world’s population paying for fifty percent of the military action in the world, a sign of colonialism? His not wanting an army base? The plans, the danger, the CIA and the hostility? The attempt on his life? His discussions with his father, the father nominating the brother? Nasir and his meeting with the council of elders? The CIA, the satellite surveillance, the bombing of his car?

15.The portrait of the CIA: the boss and his fabrications about Bob, Fred and his distancing himself? The discussions between Fred and Jane, exercising policy? Stan, letting him go to Beirut, the information in the movie theatre? The scene with Fred at home? Fred and the supervising of the assassination of Nasir? The detail of the satellite surveillance? The murder – the people watching, the mutual congratulations?

16.The workers in the Gulf, from Pakistan and other countries? The board meeting and the merger, dismissals? The announcing of the dismissals to the men? The father, his son, his friend? The discussions? The idle son, trying to get work, being recruited while kicking the football, he and his friend, his initial scepticism about religion? The classes? The smooth operator, persuading them to come into the inner cell? The gun? Recording their wills – and their later being played at the end of the film? On the boats – the crash into the boat? The suicide? The context of Americans in the Middle East, the nature of insurgency?

17.Ordinary audiences and citizens watching the film, their presuppositions of faith in government, naïve attitudes towards those in power, the reality of power and greed, abuse of power, exercise of violence, lack of moral basis? The background for the development of terrorist activities?

MUNICH

US, 2005, 160 minutes, Colour.
Eric Bana, Geoffrey Rush, Matthieu Kassovitz, Daniel Craig, Ciaran Hinds, Matthieu Amalric, Michel Lonsdale.
Directed by Steven Spielberg.

Steven Spielberg is, to say the least, prolific. Within six months of his War of the Worlds, he has released Munich. Munich has caused some controversy with its picture of Israeli agents in clandestine pursuit of the terrorist killers of members of the Israeli team at the 1972 Munich Olympic Games. Many Jewish commentators in particular have denounced the film as anti-Israel. This seems a strange accusation against a director who made Schindler’s List and who invested so much of his own finances into setting up the video record of survivors of the Holocaust.

Whatever the stances of the Jewish critics, Munich is one of the most disturbing films in recent times.

Audiences can read global conspiracy novels like those of Robert Ludlum and be amazed at the intricacies and dangers of the plots, especially with fictional heroes who submerge themselves in alien worlds, survive undercover, risk lives and sanity for their righteous cause. So, we enjoy movies like the Bourne Identity and Supremacy. But, with Munich, this was real life. This is a 1970s world of terrorists and counter-terrorists who are paid assassins, at the will of governments but publicly distanced and disowned by these governments.

If this were a documentary, we would be looking more objectively at the situations, even as we responded emotionally. But, here, we have a drama with recognised actors playing the roles, inviting us to identify with them and their mission, making us complicit, however willing or unwilling we may be, in the search, the stalking, the violence and the killings.

Depending on our politics, on our consciences and moral stances, we can applaud the mission for vengeance or we can be bewildered by the world in which we live, by law, justice and morality, by the ethos of the eye for the eye. While the events took place three decades earlier, the final image is the New York skyline and the Twin Towers, an icon that evokes all kinds of emotions that can reinforce or cloud judgments.

The events in Munich recur throughout the film, the audience seeing ever more detail, the cumulative effect of the Black September violence. The film is really Post-Munich? or Munich and its aftermath.

The screenplay was written by Tony Kushner, playwright of Angels over America, the drama critical of Senator Joseph McCarthy? and Roy Cohn, linking this ‘scoundrel time’ with the history of America and, especially, the AIDS epidemic. Kushner ranges widely here in the realm of international politics and violence.

Eric Bana portrays Avner, a Mossad officer who is commissioned to form a squad to execute the Black September terrorists. Daniel Craig, Ciaran Hinds, Matthieu Kassovitz, Hanns Zischler are the crack squad who have various complementary lethal skills, who are committed to Israel. The screenplay traces their interactions, Bana’s leadership, the gathering of information (Matthieu Amalric and Michael Lonsdale are particularly impressive as the French apolitical sources), the travels to many cities of Europe and the killings, successful and unsuccessful.

Vengeance takes its toll not only on those who experience the violence but also on those who act on it. This is also a clear message of the film. Avner becomes more and more disturbed as the mission goes on. Fellow members are killed. There are serious demands on his marriage. The government distances itself from him.

Spielberg and Kushner take us on a very long journey (160 minutes), immerse us in the vengeance and leave it to us to try to work out what we feel and think.

1.A Steven Spielberg film? His range of interests? His interest in things Jewish, matters Israeli? His movie-making style, craft? Audience responses, in the US less favourable, overseas more favourable? Oscar nomination for best film, best director?

2.The critique of the film, especially by Israeli commentators? Their accusing Spielberg of being anti-Israeli? Was this evident in the film – or not?

3.The political background of the film, the tensions in the Middle East, the state of Israel, the treatment of the Palestinians, the wars, 1967? Terrorists in the 60s and 70s? The widespread groups around Europe and terrorism? The final image of the Twin Towers and the comment on terrorism? The impact of the 70s in later decades?

4.The title, the Munich Olympic Games, world knowledge of the games, this part of history, Black September, the Palestinians, the killing of the Israeli hostages? The opening with the terrorists, seeing them as ordinary, their infiltration, masks, over the fence, into the dormitories, rounding up the Israelis, the brutality, the hostages, their fears, the treatment? Their demands? The reaction of the authorities? The German military and government? The van, to the airport, the shooting, the deaths of the Palestinians, the deaths of the Israelis? The fact that these sequences were interspersed throughout the film, with a cumulative effect?

5.Israel’s response, Golda Meier and her meeting with her ministers? The political issues of the state of Israel? Not countenancing terrorism? Retaliation? The world, support? The United States? Israel seen as victim? The Palestinian aggressors? The issues of justice in Palestine and Israel? Golda Meyer and the discussions, her advice, the decisions? The government giving backing to the squad – but not officially?

6.Geoffrey Rush as the official, his presence during the discussions, listening? His visiting Avner? Taking him to meet Golda Meyer? The briefing, his being the liaison, his personal stances? Distancing the group from the Mossad? The conditions, the nature of the mission to hunt down and assassinate the killers? Avner being received by Golda Meyer and her praising him and his father? At the end on his own, no medal – but a message from the prime minister?

7.Eric Bana as Avner? His father’s reputation? Being a loyal member of Mossad? Israeli with German background? The role of his father, his mother and her reputation? The meetings with his mother throughout the film, discussions, the hospital, at the end, her blind loyalty in support of his action? His relationship with his wife, their marriage, love, her pregnancy, the birth of his daughter? His not seeing his wife? Her not knowing what was happening, her being asked to trust? His absence for long times? The burden for her? The phone calls, the visit to the hospital at the time of the birth? Resettling her in New York and the effect for her in a different land?

8.The establishing of the team, Avner as leader, meeting with the group, the personalities of each member, their particular skills, manners? The cohesion and collaboration? The growing bonds between them? Their work, making the bombs, the strategies? Gleaning information? The tensions, the decisions? The executions and the aftermath? The toll on each of them? The toll on Avner, physical, mental, moral? His visit to his wife? The visit of Efraim? His final fears, feeling that he was stalked in New York City? Trying to find peace?

9.The importance of getting information, the amounts of money available from the Israeli government? The arrangements in the Swiss bank? The various contacts? Louis, the Frenchman, his personality, motives, apolitical? The visit to Louis’ father, the blindfold, the farm, the family dinner, the welcome to Avner, the closeness – but the ruthlessness in the dealings? That Avner was really not family? The discussions, the phone calls, the later meetings? The father and his helping Avner, warning him? The motivation of this group, the profits that they made?

10.The various assassinations, the singling out of the members of Black September or their associates? Diplomats in England and in Cyprus? The travels to the different cities? The cover? The explosions – in the diplomat’s room and the balcony? Avner in the room next door, talking with the diplomat? The couple in the next room and the explosion affecting them, the eyes of the woman? The diplomat in London, his wife and daughter, the timing, the signals, the daughter returning, answering the phone, Avner able to stop the explosion? Her escaping? The diplomat killed? The other confrontations and executions? The party and the attempt to get the leader, infiltrating into the grounds, being discovered, their losing the opportunity? The information about Lebanon? Their being warned not to go there? The group going, observing, the explosions and the killings? Louis and his grim reaction?

11.The deaths of the various members of the group, the German and his going out for a walk, dead on the park bench? The girl from Amsterdam, trying to pick up Avner, her picking up the businessman, his being killed? The bomb expert, his personality, his skill with the bombs, exasperation with the material supplied by Louis? The killing of the KGB agent? The consequences? His retirement?

12.The assassin, in the hotel, trying to seduce Avner, his being tempted, resisting? The other member and his picking her up, death? Avner noticing the perfume? The information about the girl, tracking her down in Holland, the confrontation and killing her?

13.The issues of terrorism and violence, violence begetting violence? The motivation of vengeance, retaliation? A moral principle or not?

14.The politics, the state of Israel, undercover agents, governments not acknowledging this kind of execution or terrorism? Morality, justice, law and vengeance?

15.The audience being invited to watch the events, identify with the characters, question themselves about the moral stances?

BROKEBACK MOUNTAIN

US, 2005, 134 minutes, Colour.
Heath Ledger, Jake Gylenhaal, Randy Quaid, Michelle Williams, Anne Hathaway.
Directed by Ang Lee.

Once a film wins awards and is nominated for Oscars and expected to win, it sets up a whole different dynamic for audiences who go to see it. Expectations are generally far too high – which is worse if the film is different from the kind of film that usually wins. What makes response to Brokeback Mountain even more hazardous is the religious response to the film (or to reports about the film rather than the film itself). Various Church groups in the US have been outspoken in their condemnation (and some of the websites – check ‘Brokeback Mountain’, Church, Protests on a search engine and many pages come up – some rather vitriolic) and these reactions have been highly publicised, both those supporting and those denouncing the protests.

Brokeback Mountain was originally a short story by E.Annie Proulx (The Shipping News), under 40 pages, that one could read in about a third of the running time of the film. It used a flashback structure where Ennis Del Mar remembered his time herding sheep with Jack Twist on Wyoming’s Brokeback Mountain in 1963 and their relationship and infrequent meetings over twenty years. It was a story of loneliness and regrets.

Novelist and Pulitzer prizewinning author, Larry McMurtry? (The Last Picture Show, Lonesome Dove) and Diana Ossana have continued their screenwriting collaboration in amplifying the short story and have treated it in direct linear fashion, keeping the regrets and grief until the end. It is interesting to note that the setting is 1963, the year that McMurtry’s? novel Horseman Pass By was filmed with Paul Newman as Hud, a different look at the 20th century American cowboy.

The cinematography for Brokeback Mountain by Rodrigo Prieto is, using the cliché, absolutely stunning. The mountainscapes of Wyoming, the changes of the seasons, the rounding up of the sheep are very beautiful, giving a grandeur and dignity to the action. Ennis and Jack are enveloped by the power of nature.

And what of the theme? And its treatment? And how should audiences who hope they have a developed moral sensitivity and conscience respond? Especially in comparison with other issue themes in films which exercise moral conversations?

A safe principle for any storytelling is that there is no limit on what can be presented. Any kind of sexual relationship is a valid subject simply because it is part of human experience. To argue that would be a form of denial by suppression or repression. The issue for moral discussion is always how the topic is presented.

This means that Brokeback Mountain’s presentation and exploration of the sexual relationship between Ennis and Jack is a legitimate subject for a film.

On the one hand, director Ang Lee says that his film is not a gay film. On the other hand, some American commentators have declared that the film ‘glorifies’ homosexual relationships. Lee says that his film is about two men, two lonely men, isolated from their families, who are drawn to each other. This develops into an intense love with sexual expression that continues for two decades despite each of the men marrying and having children. Lee presents it as something which does occur in all societies. He obviously presents it sympathetically rather than making a crusade for it.

This raises the issue of homophobia, especially in American society. Responders to the cries of outrage ask why this issue seems to evoke more outcry than many others, especially in the context of concern about representations of violence in the news and in the media, of the obscenities of exploitation, civil war, rape and famine in countries of Africa and of the experiences of war, soldier children and terrorism which does not evoke the same heartfelt reactions. Irrespective of the merits or not of Brokeback Mountain, this is an important question that the release of the film raises.

The major world religions have had to discuss the issues of homosexual orientation and behaviour and how these fit with their moral codes. Brokeback Mountain, because it is sympathetic but not crusading, contributes data to this continued discussion. And that is important. Catholic teaching is quite clear. Fr Richard Leonard SJ in his review for the Australian Catholic Film Office gives a key reference for this teaching: The Catechism is very clear about the official teaching of the Catholic Church as regards homosexual acts. They are ‘intrinsically disordered’ and the inclination itself is ‘objectively disordered’ (#2357). In the next paragraph, however, the Church instructs us that gay women and men “must be accepted with respect, compassion and sensitivity” (#2358).

It seems that the relationship between Ennis and Jack is being presented with sympathy, the image of the two shirts is a powerful symbol of the love between them. Heath Ledger’s and Jake Gylenhaal’s performances make their characters and their dilemmas very real. It needs to be stressed that there is a lot more going on in the films two and a quarter hours running time besides the relationship, many more characters, including wives and families. It also needs to be stressed that there are some brief and not quite so explicit scenes that could disturb some audiences. The film also shows the consequences of Ennis’ and Jack’s adulterous behaviour and choices not only for themselves and their secretive meetings but on their families. These are issues of fidelity and commitment. The treatment of Ennis’s relationship with his wife and his children shows Ennis’s inadequacies as husband and parent, with understanding and sympathy as well as criticism.

The plot of Brokeback Mountain is controversial, certainly, in today’s moral climate and needs to be discussed with both discernment and compassion.

1.The acclaim for the film? Awards? Direction, performance, photography, musical score, direction?

2.The controversies that the film raised? About sexual politics? About religion and stances on sexuality? The protests?

3.The adaptation by Larry McMurtry? of the short story? His imagination for expanding it?

4.The scope: the places, the times? A piece of Americana, 1960s to 1980s? In the perspective of the beginning of the 21st century?

5.The location photography, the mountains and the beauty, nature, rugged? The contrast with the dusty towns? Wyoming, Texas? The contrasts? The American west in the 20th century?

6.The role of cowboys in 1963, herding the sheep, odd jobs, seasonal? On the move, the background of farm work, rodeos? With their vehicles, camping gear? The tradition of the 19th century, hard work, isolation?

7.The story of this love between Ennis and Jack, in the middle of the beauty of nature? The film’s comment on the relationship?

8.The re-creation of period, the costumes, décor, haircuts…? The musical score?

9.The manager, his arrival at his caravan, the interiors, his interviewing for jobs, the discussions with Ennis and Jack? The demands he made on them? His watching them and their relationship? His holding it against them? His dismissing Jack and not employing him? The stances of the 1960s face to face with this kind of relationship?

10.Ennis, his arrival, sitting and waiting? Jack in his truck? The interviews for the jobs, meeting each other, the commission to look after the sheep, the summer, the rules set down? Organising themselves, the sheep, keeping away the foxes, the camp, meals, supplies? The bear spooking the donkey and their losing the food? Washing in the stream? Keeping watch over the sheep?

11.The beginnings of the relationship? Their talking, Ennis talking more than he normally would? Not realising how sympathetic a listener Jack was? Jack and his interest? The glimpses of Ennis washing? The cold? Coming down from the mountain, staying the night? Jack and his sexual approach? Ennis’s quick response? The aftermath?

12.Homosexuality, in Ennis, latent? His not knowing? His harsh childhood, parents killed in an accident, his brother and sister, by himself? His reaction to the episode, saying that it was a one-off, in denial? Yet the tenderness? The difference with Jack, Jack and his knowing, his background? Family, the ranch, helping out, the rodeo? Together on the mountain, the intimacy, the horseplay, the sharing? Their being lax about the sheep, the fox killing the sheep? The final round-up, coming down from the mountain, not knowing that the manager had seen them?

13.The parting, laconic, the cowboy way? The emotional effect on Ennis, his going into the side street, retching? Moved? His missing his shirt? His later discovering that Jack had taken it? Seeing the shirt inside the shirt later? The postcards and the minimal communication?

14.Ennis, meeting Alma, thinking that he should get married, courting her, the wedding? The early years, the poverty, the hard life, his being a workaholic, work and avoiding home life? The birth of the girls? The details of the family life together? Jack’s card, his visit? Alma and her tension, seeing them kiss? Alma in herself, loving wife, hard-working, a loving mother? Working in the supermarket? The attentions of the manager? The tensions, Ennis always having to go off, her wanting him to take responsibility? His inability to support the family? The passing of the years, the tensions, Jack’s visits? The official divorce? Alma and her remarrying, her relationship with her daughters, the family scenes, the meals with Ennis visiting? The daughters and their father? Their love for their father? Alma and her comment on the fishing gear, that she had checked it and that they had never caught any fish?

15.Jack’s life, the rodeo circuit, seeing the girl, her hard riding, the drinks, her flirting, the sexual encounter, his hesitation? The marriage? Prosperous, the hard work, the farming gear? The father and his pride, his wife? Jack’s son, driving him in the engines? The years passing? The tension at the Thanksgiving dinner, the son watching the television, Jack turning it off, the father-in-law turning it on again, Jack defying him, speaking to him straight? Taking for granted his wife? Her being busy about the business? Not suspecting? Whether he loved her or not? The self-assertion, the drifting apart? Her knowledge of his going off to visit Ennis?

16.The visits, Ennis and his longing for the visits, Jack and his dependence on them? The time between them? Affection, sexual encounters? At the river, in the middle of nature, diving naked from the cliff? The visits over twenty years? The gradual tension? Jack proposing that they form the ranch together? Ennis’s refusal? His excuses? His still being in denial about his orientation and relationship?

17.Ennis and the waitress, flirting, discussions, her hoping to marry? Her being upset when he rejected her? Ennis and the visit of his daughter Alma, the bonds between them, talking? His distance from his wife and family?

18.The news of Jack’s death, the previous story of the homophobic bashing? The story that Jack was killed while changing a tyre, Ennis presuming that he was murdered? The visual suggestions of this? The pathos of Jack’s life, his death? His relationship with his wife, son, his visit to Mexico and the prostitute? His discussions with Ennis about this, needs, fidelity?

19.Ennis and the impact of Jack’s death, his having settled, his caravan? Visiting Jack’s wife, the discussions, her attitude, the issue of the ashes? Going to visit Jack’s parents, laconic, the ashes and the issue of where they should be buried or scattered? The role of Brokeback Mountain? The mother’s inviting Ennis to see Jack’s room, his discovery of the shirts?

20.The twenty years, Ennis’s regrets, grief, the symbol of Brokeback Mountain and the 1963 experience?

21.How sympathetic was the film to the relationship, love and tenderness? Public opinion? Moral issues and stances? The depiction of the relationship – and responses for and against?

ELVIS HAS LEFT THE BUILDING

US, 2004, 90 minutes, Colour.
Kim Basinger, John Corbett, Annie Potts, Sean Astin, Denise Richards, Mike Starr, Phill Lewis, Philip Charles Mc Kenzie, Billy Ray Cyrus, Richard Kind, David Leisure, Tom Hanks, Joel Zwick, Angie Dickinson, Pat Morita, Jill Mc Kinnie, Wayne Newton.
Directed by Joel Zwick.

Elvis Has Left The Building is a moderately amusing film – especially for those who detest Elvis impersonators. (For Elvis impersonators audiences can watch Bubba Hotep as well as Nicholas Cage in Honeymoon in Vegas.)

The film has Kim Basinger as Harmony Jones, a Pink Lady saleslady for cosmetics, who met Elvis when she was young and befriended him. However, as she gets disillusioned with her job, Elvis impersonators fall dead around her. Also in trouble is John Corbett, about to be divorced from Denise Richards who is an Elvis impersonator. An Elvis impersonator is killed near him as well. Mike Starr and Phill Lewis are two FBI agents who pursue the investigation of the deaths – finishing up, mingling with the crowd, doing an Elvis impersonation and winning the contest in Las Vegas.

The supporting cast includes Annie Potts as Basinger’s friend, Sean Astin as an advertising agent. There are guest appearances from Tom Hanks as one of the killed Elvises as well as director Joel Zwick. Angie Dickinson turns up as Kim Basinger’s mother. Pat Morita is also there as well as Wayne Newton as himself.

The film is amusing in an undemanding way. Joel Zwick also directed My Big Fat Greek Wedding, starring John Corbett.

1.A light and entertaining film? The basic premise? The Elvis impersonators – and their destruction? Elvis’s revenge? Romantic comedy? Satirical and surreal?

2.The American settings, the southern states, the trip across America from Texas to Nevada? The landscapes? The towns?

3.The musical score, the range of Elvis’s songs? Their insertion into the plot? The lyrics commenting on characters and situations?

4.The title, the mystique of Elvis Presley? His death in 1977? The opening information about impersonators? The proliferation? The story of Harmony Jones and the destruction of the impersonators?

5.The structure of the film: Harmony, her life, her work, disillusionment, the encounter with Miles? The deaths? Her reaction, the police? Las Vegas? Miles and romance? The flashbacks, Harmony as a child, her mother and the cars, her father? The encounter with Elvis and the drive in the car? The salesman pretending that it was Elvis’s car and collapsing? The initial encounter with Miles as a little boy?

6.Kim Basinger as Harmony, her appearance, in pink, a Pink Lady, her car? Her spiel to the women? Her losing interest, disillusionment? The further presentations and her failure, giving the cosmetics away? Finally changing into a black dress? The encounter with the Elvis impersonator? His asking her to help with the make-up, his setting himself on fire? Driving along the highway, the letterbox, it flying through the air and killing the other impersonator? The impersonator at the car, the lipstick holding the engine down, its bursting out and impaling him? Her fears for the other impersonators, thinking Miles was an impersonator?

7.Harmony and her fear of causing accidents, trying to avoid them? Blaming herself, thinking she was going to Hell? The encounter with Miles and seeing his Elvis suit? Her trying to ring Shirl, her friendship with Shirl and their discussions? Finally meeting her, the story? Going to the date, Miles standing her up, her locking him in the trunk of the car? His finally getting out – and the romance? The looking into the sky – and the Elvis silhouette in the stars? The death of the impersonators? A sympathetic character?

8.Miles, tall, dark and handsome, his shrew of a wife? Bringing the suit to Las Vegas for her, the divorce? The death of the impersonator with the sign falling on him? The encounter with Harmony? His trying to get in touch with her, the gay man at the phone, meeting him, the gay patter? Finding Harmony, helping her with the tyre, arranging for the rendezvous? His not turning up, the police pursuing him on suspicion of murder? The newspaper headlines? Hiding in the boot – and trapped there? Finally getting out, the truth, romance?

9.Shirl, in the pool, the children overturning her? Her being away? Finally meeting Harmony and giving her advice?

10.Aaron, the advertising, Miles and his phone calls? Aaron and his wanting the models, the sex aspect of advertising, the old man? Miles drawing the heart on Harmony’s hand, surrendering to emotions? The advertising campaign?

11.Sal and Charlie, Charlie and his obsessions, worries about his health? Sal as the big man? The investigations, the patter between the two? Finding the succession of dead impersonators? Going to to Las Vegas, trying to mingle, as impersonators, their performance, winning the competition? A sympathetic odd couple?

12.Belinda, her marriage to Miles, the divorce, as an Elvis impersonator, wanting to get the suit? Stealing a suit in Las Vegas? Her encounter with the man in the turban, his misunderstanding her? The rumours that Elvis was alive, the stampede, on the roof?

13.Darren, the comic gay man, the friendship with Harmony, on the phone, the patter?

14.The various Elvis impersonators, losers, personalities, their deaths? Tom Hanks in a cameo role?

15.The happy ending for Harmony and for Miles, her ridding herself of the curse – and the deaths of the impersonators?

ARCHANGEL

UK, 2005, 133 minutes, Colour.
Daniel Craig, Yekaterina Rednikova, Gabriel Macht.
Directed by Jon Jones.

Archangel is a version of Robert Harris’s celebrated novel, speculating on the fact that Stalin may have had a son who was exiled to Siberia but, at the beginning of the 21st century, was to be a figurehead for a new communist revolution. Harris has written a number of novels including Pompeii as well as Fatherland, a speculation about the world had Hitler won World War Two.

There have been film versions of his novel Enigma with Kate Winslett and of Fatherland with Rutger Hauer.

The film is interesting in its presentation of the speculation, of the location photography in Estonia and Russia, of the opportunity to reflect on the Stalinist era, the cruelty of Stalin, the change with the fall of the Soviet Empire and the lingering communists who yearned for Stalin’s days.

Daniel Craig is the history professor at the centre of the revelation of the news about Stalin. Craig had a solid screen CV with such films as Love is the Devil and Elizabeth as well as Some Voices and also The Layer Cake. He was catapulted into The First Run with his performance as James Bond Casino Royale.

The film was made for television and directed by Jon Jones who directed the telemovie about Mrs Beaton as well as a television version of Jane Austen Northanger Abbey.

1.An entertaining thriller? Conspiracy and speculation? The popularity of this kind of novel? Film? The adaptation of Robert Harris’s novel?

2.The Russian settings, the Russian locations, Estonian locations? The city of Moscow and its detail? The streets, the underground, hotels, clubs? The Russian countryside and its isolation? The city of Archangel? The atmospheric musical score?

3.The title, the city, its place in Soviet history, the nuclear submarine fleet, accidents in Archangel? The location for hiding away the son of Stalin?

4.The structure of the film? The focus on Fluk Kelso, as a lecturer and writer, the group in Moscow, the information from the old man, his pursuing it, the American television correspondent and his interest, the tracking down of Zinaida? The death of Zinaida’s father? The confrontation with Mamentov? The other Russian authorities? The flashbacks to Stalin, the young soldier, the witnessing of Stalin’s death, Beria and the burial of the manuscript?

5.The focus on Kelso, as a character, his expertise on the Stalinist era? The lecture, the entourage? His getting the information, following it through, discovering the old man’s body? Tracking down his daughter? The club? The interactions with O’ Brien? The meeting with Mamentov? The other authorities? His staying behind? Going to the library, charming the librarian, getting the information about Stalin, about Beria? His being led to the manuscript? The dangers, the pursuit, the police, the deaths? With Zinaida? The decision to go to Archangel? With O’ Brien, their eluding O’ Brien? Travelling east? The city, getting the information, the authorities? Finding the young woman’s mother? The background of the diary, the young girl, the flashbacks and seeing her going from Archangel to Moscow, the relationship with Stalin? Her return, the birth of the child, her death?

6.Fluk and his going to see the mother, getting the information, finding out where the son was? The story of his being taken away? Tracking down the son, with O’ Brien, O’ Brien and his camera? The crash in the river? Seeing the son of Stalin, taking them to the house, his personality, resemblance to Stalin, intensity, madness, admiring his father, studying his documents?

7.The attack of the pursuers, the military, the official, his pulling the gun on the soldiers? Kelso and O’ Brien escaping? The pursuit, O’ Brien’s death? Kelso and his escape on the river, the return to Archangel, finding that Zinaida had been arrested, in prison, the bribe to get her out? Zinaida, her studying law, her being a callgirl at the club, the first encounters with Kelso, her resentment towards her father, her father and his not following the party line, wanting the manuscript for his daughter, his death? Her decision to go with Kelso? The dangers, the shootings, going to Archangel, with the mother, her arrest, prison, release?

8.The final confrontation between Kelso and Mamentov? The realisation that Mamentov has orchestrated everything: Kelso’s lectures, the group, the old man being part of the story, getting his curiosity, finding the manuscript, Mamentov buying Beria’s house? The motivation: the authenticity of the documents if they were proclaimed by Kelso as a reputable historian and author rather than Mamentov?

9.O’ Brien, his brashness, the film, wanting to get the story out, his contacts? The scenes on the television? Precipitating Mamentov’s move? The train trip, the crowds acclaiming Stalin’s son, his appearing at the steps? Zinaida and her decision, the flashbacks to her childhood with her father and the gun, her shooting Stalin’s son?

10.The film ending at that moment – allowing the audience to speculate on what might happen?

11.The background of Russia, the Stalinist era, the prisoners in the gulags? The changes with Gorbachev? The Putin era? The resentment of the old-style communists? Their moves for power? The background of the contemporary Russian authorities, bugging rooms, pursuits? Military?

12.A satisfying entertainment – thriller, history, conspiracy theory?

LAST TRAIN TO FREO

Australia, 2006, 85 minutes, Colour.
Steve Le Marquand, Tom Budge, Gigi Edgley, Lisa Hensley, Gillian Jones, Glenn Hazeldene, Reg Cribb.
Directed by Jeremy Simms.

Last Train to Freo is a surprisingly impressive film. However, potential audiences need to be warned that it is quite tough going. Playwright Reg Cribb has adapted his theatre work for the screen. However, he has retained the single set and much of the dialogue. While the film does indicate its stage origins, the editing and pace make it much more cinematic than might be expected.

Freo is the Aussie abbreviation for the coastal city of Fremantle, out from Perth. The last train goes through the suburbs of Perth, through central Perth to the coast. This particular night, the guards are on strike and there are very few passengers. The set is the single train carriage – which can feel a bit claustrophobic but director and editor have made sure there is such a variety of shots, close-ups and medium shots so it is as if the camera is doing our focus for us as we change our glance from one character to another.

The principal characters are two former prisoners, one middle-aged with a loud mouth and tough attitude. The other is a young drug addict, emotionally dependent on the older man. They horse around, interact with banter (which is sometimes vicious) and wait for whoever comes into the carriage. Steve Le Marquand (listed as The Tall Thug) received a well-deserved nomination for Australian Film Institute Best Actor for 2006. Tom Budge is effective as the young Trevor.

The first passenger is a young woman, Lisa (Gigi Edgely) who gets the expected treatment, the taunts, the sexist remarks, the flirting, the menace. Next comes a quiet man who sits at the back and seems to be taking notes. Then an older woman arrives with suitcases. She has left her drunken husband. She stands up for Lisa, gets told off and sits and waits.

At first this is not entirely gripping and one wonders what the film is about and (besides Freo) where it is going.

Then tables turn, surprising revelations emerge and all the characters are powerfully involved in emotional, verbal and physical interactions.

The acting is exemplary. The dialogue, very salty (to use a euphemism). The revelation of character well worth the experience. Actor Jeremy Sims has done fine work in transferring this play to the screen.

1.The impact of the film? The single set? The focus on characters, dialogue, interactions? The twists? The cumulative effect of being in the train carriage with these characters over the hour and a half?

2.The original play, the adaptation by the author for the screen? The single set, acting as a stage? The camera and its ability for close-ups, for group scenes? The editing of the play as cinema? Claustrophobic or not? The dialogue, the action?

3.The musical score, the music in the train, the classics? Trevor and his beating the tempo for Vivaldi? The discussions about ‘Moonlight Sonata’? ‘The Blue Danube’ and the dancing? The range of classics?

4.The strength of the performances, commanding audience attention, interest, puzzle?

5.The title, night on the train, the last train, the Western Australian setting, Perth, the train going through Perth to Fremantle? The train itself, the guards on strike? The various stops, the information on the PA system, the doors closing? The delay and the train stopping? The various stations, the time between stations, the stations as lonely – and the stations with the revellers outside?

6.The character of the tall thug? The introduction, his height, look, tattoos, audiences judging them? His manner of speaking? The relationship with Trevor? A kind of guardian, yet attacking him, the horseplay, the cultured talk, the classics, music, Prague? Intelligent but coming from the Midlands? His going to Freo? The dependence with Trevor? Trevor as young, on drugs, having slit his wrists, brash, the music, the bet, the fooling around? The two and their poses, as thugs, the prison background, the effect? Later discovering the truth about them? The psychological discussions?

7.Lisa and her getting on the train, her age, appearance, alone, reticent, the advances, her reaction to the taunts? Her smiling, then laughing? Talk, studying law? The possibility of her getting a cab? The bets whether she would leave the train or not? Her own fears, moods, defensiveness? The sexual advances? The dance? Maureen’s arrival, offering her the money for the taxi, her not going, her wanting to be self-reliant, her criticisms of Maureen?

8.The tall thug and his reaction to Lisa, asking about her, taunting her, commenting on her fears, her disdain? The dance, the sexual innuendo, the discussions about her boyfriend, the law, the effect of these conversations on each of them? Trevor and his participating, being silent, observing? Playing up to the tall thug? The bet about moving on?

9.Maureen and her getting on the train, her age, appearance, the cases, silent, her reactions, defending Lisa, giving her the twenty dollars, being told off? Her telling the story of her life, her husband, the drinking, the marriage, the children? The tall thug offering to kill her husband? Her reaction? Her interventions? A good woman, not getting off the train?

10.Simon, the passenger, his appearance, bald, sitting at the back of the carriage, alone, jottings? Observing? Finally the tall thug approaching him, demanding an apology, looking at his notes, reading them aloud, the argument?

11.The story of the attack on the station, the knives, the girlfriend, the court, the sentence? The tall thug and his explaining he was not guilty, his short sentence?

12.Simon and the revelation about his brother, his anger, listening, wanting the tall thug to explain why he attacked his brother? Not just describe? His having the gun, his demands? The irony of his being with Lisa, the reasons for observing the two? Lisa setting them up? The confession, the motivation? The court sequences, his not speaking up, his reaction to his brother being gay, the shame? His anger at his brother in a vegetative state? The aftermath?

13.The tall thug, taunting Simon, recognising him, the change, the situation and the mood, Simon and the gun, the truth, the tall thug and his affair with Simon’s brother, the brother being ashamed of him, his loving the brother, not introducing him to the family, the knife, the brother attacking? The defence, the vegetative state? Trevor’s reaction to this information?

14.The further talk, insights, the interactions and enlightenment? The interconnectedness of the group on the train? The cathartic effect? Seeing the site of the attack, getting off the train – what was each character left with?

15.The comment on society, critique, the good and the bad, opportunities and choices, crime, boredom and violence, the need for love, commitment, betrayal, sexual relationships, homosexuality, prison? The need to confess? Healing?