THE ART OF INCARCERATION

Australia, 2021, 77 minutes, Colour.

Jack Charles, Robby Wirramanda, Christopher Austin.

Directed by Alex Siddons.

Some years ago there was a very significant documentary on the imprisonment of First Nations men and women, Incarceration Nation. It highlighted the overwhelming statistics, prison treatment.

Interestingly, this brief documentary, which also highlights the statistics, uses the word ‘Incarceration’ over imprisonment. The Oxford Dictionary indicates a nuance: the state of being confined in prison; imprisonment. And, ‘confined’ is also a significant word, used in the title for an annual art exhibition at the Fulham Centre in Victoria, the Confined art exhibition.

The focus of this film is on male prisoners, especially middle-aged men. They tell their stories. The film itself is introduced by Uncle Jack Charles, by now a well-known First Nations icon, actor, television presenter, social commentator, drawing on his own experiences of crime when young, prison, out, back again… He knows from experience what he is talking about.

The men interviewed for the film have similar experiences, crime when young, growing up in this kind of atmosphere, introduced to drugs, addictions, robberies, imprisonment, getting out, continuing addictions, back to jail…

One of the key characters throughout the film is Robby Wirramanda, big, burly, jovial talker, singer… The film also focuses on two of the prisoners and their life story. But the important thing is art. The men express the continued desire to get back to their First Nation’s roots, knowledge and awareness, a sense of belonging. And, they are finding this through art, through painting – and the camera does highlight quite a number of the paintings, and the attention to detail, colour, design, myth-making.

There is also a sadness underlying the interviews, memories of the past, regrets, opportunities after leaving prison, the experience of parole, the continued effects of drugtaking – the men quite articulate in their self-expression and vocabulary, and a sudden jolt when it is revealed, just after we have looked at him and listened to him, that he had overdosed and is dead.

There are the members from The Torch organisation, non-profit, which sponsors the Confined exhibition, the men coming in, sharing experiences, tutoring, encouraging.

Which means then that this documentary takes its place alongside so many which look at the prison system, at the experience of confinement, incarceration, but also of a imaginative possibilities for the men and their self-respect, and for creative rehabilitation.

HOSTAGE HOUSE

US, 2021, 85 minutes, Colour.

Jennifer Taylor, Julia Terranova, Emily Sweet, Justin C.Schilling, Patrick Cronen, Richard Neil, Kaymen Casey.

Directed by David Benullo.

Hostage House is a plain, unvarnished title. That is the setting for this hostage thriller. It is nothing more, nothing less – although, towards the end there are some surprising developments in character twists.

Susan is quite a successful real estate agent and is going to a mansion for an open house day. The daughter, Heather, is going off to college, after the death of her father, her mother thinking about selling their home. All seems normal enough, a visit from Susan’s demanding boss, and an encounter with the rather quiet security guard driving by. (Both characters reappear later in the film.)

A young couple have been involved in a robbery which has resulted in the death of the house owner who is not expected to be present and not have a gun. The young man, expert on picking locks, has been shot. As expected, they take over the house, the daughter trying to escape, being brought back. Susan offers to use her first aid kit to help the wounded man and she does.

The young woman is quite brazen, with the gun, Susan realising that she is pregnant. The young man, is much more sympathetic, explaining that he wanted no violence. So, there are interchanges between the four. Then Susan’s boss, Paul, turns up, tries to make a financial deal with the couple who have to be in phone contact with their boss. Paul tries to make an escape but becomes impaled on the iron fence.

Just when mother and daughter finally to escape, with the help of the young man, they encounter the security man on patrol – and, of course, he is revealed as the boss at the other end of the phone. So, once again, dangerous confrontations and threats, the police closing in, the wounding of the young man, the death of the boss, the arrest of the young woman.

The film has a nice happy ending with the daughter going off to college, the house sold, happily. Then, unexpectedly, a scene with the young woman giving birth, joyful with the child – and then the authorities taking it away from her and she crying out in desperation. Not quite the ending expected but the film taking a stance on justice and punishment for crime, especially by this callous young woman.

THE LAST SON

US, 2021, 96 minutes, Colour.

Sam Worthington, Colson Baker, Thomas and Jane, Heather Graham.

Directed by Tim Sutton.

"Isaac LeMay roamed the Great Plains and the Western territories taking up with whores and siring children across the land without thought to consequence. He gained employment clearing Cheyenne for the army and it was the ugliness of this task which turned him to ruin. For his crimes, the Cheyenne chief White Thunder cursed him to be killed by his own seed. Haunted, Isaac tracked down his children one by one and killed them before they did the same to him."

This is how this film begins and ends.

Those who enjoy the conventions of Western genres, this will not be entertaining. It will be too dark, gloomy, brooding. For those who enjoyed westerns going beyond the conventions, they have found it very satisfying.

Sam Worthington, almost unrecognisable, bearded, is Isaac LeMay of the opening quotation. The film shows his quest to confront his many children and to destroy them before they destroy him. He kills one twin son but goes in pursuit of the other (both played by Colson Baker, musician Machine Gun Kelly). There is also another daughter whom he visits on a farm. And there is an hour, the prostitute who is the mother of the twins (Heather Graham). As well, there is the military man who is persuaded to pursue I sack and kill him (Thomas Jane).

The film shows Solomon and his pursuit, encountering Anna. The film also has the reckless and ruthless son and his friends commandeering a Gatling gun, mowing down opponents, using it in a bank robbery.

There will be a confrontation between father and son – but it will be the daughter who has the last moment with her father.

1. The title? The opening quotation, the story of Isaac, his past, relationships, siring children, time passing, the Shy end curse?
2. A grim West, literally dark and brooding, the Montana scenery, homesteads, towns, the bank, the military, the saloons, the brothels? The musical score?
3. Isaak, Sam Worthington, unrecognisable, bearded? Travelling the West, the loner, going to the bar, the confrontation with the bar keeper? Search for his sons, finding the first win, the shootout? Pursuing the other son? Eventually meeting him, the confrontation, death?
4. Going to the farm, the woman and her husband, the daughter, the relationship, the gun? The daughter going on a quest, her travels and encounters?
5. Solomon, military, the quest for Isaac, his personality, the visit to the saloon, the encounter with Anna, the continued pursuit, the issue of the Gatling gun, the military and the deaths? The suddenness of his death?
6. Carl, his friends, taking the Gatling gun, firing indiscriminately, the ambush and killing the military? The bank robbery, the treatment of the people, reckless glee?
7. Isaak, his pursuit, finding Carl, the confrontation, shootout?
8. The daughter, pursuing Isaac, finding him, the gun, death, the end of the curse cycle?

THE JANES

US, 2022, 101 minutes, Colour.

Directed by Tis Lessin, Emma Pildes.

A documentary about the status of abortion, moral and legal, in the United States from the late 1960s to the early 1970s and the Supreme Court decision, Roe vs Wade.

Over the almost 50 years since that Supreme Court decision, there has been a change of attitude towards abortion in the United States. While there are still many earnest men and women who are Pro-Life, anti-abortion, there is still more who are pro-abortion and have taken a stance Pro-Choice.

This is a film that needs to be seen by those who take both stances. It will reinforce the Pro-abortion stances, taken on moral grounds, especially Christian and biblical grounds. But, the film shows a group of American women in Chicago who were moved by the number of young women especially who were pregnant and did not want to go through with the pregnancy. A group gathered, took the anonymous name, Jane, when they answered the phone, had meetings with the women, took them to the place of abortion, ensured that the situation was physically safe and hygienic. The film also highlights the nature of the “backyard abortions” of the time, the callous attitudes of some abortionists, some who are of sexual predators, and a kind of abortion industry set up by Mafia types.

The film contains a significant number of talking heads, of so many of the women remembering almost 50 years on. And, there are a lot of photos of the women when they were young, footage when they were active, protesting. In their senior years, they are a group of very serious, quite dignified, earnest women who believed firmly in what they were doing at the time.

Because abortion was illegal, they were always in danger of being followed and, at the end of the film, there is a powerful sequence when, in fact, police did follow them and found the women, both abortionists and pregnant women, arrested them and put them in jail, along with the local prisoners for the night, especially the Street walkers of Chicago. Eventually they got legal help from a powerful lawyer who had worked for the Black Panthers. It is still a sobering experience as the women look back. (There is also an interview with a police officer at the time who reflects on his own attitudes and behaviour.)

Which means then that this is a scene in epic and historical document which ever stand one takes – and a reminder that when the stands becomes an ideology there is a danger that there is no possibility for dialogue or mutual understanding.

The film took on more significance because of the time that it was released on American television, the Supreme Court overturned the Roe vs Wade past decision leading to a great deal of legal chaos, antagonism, protests (even around the world), meaning that any abortion became illegal in a significant number of states, remained illegal in other states where women could travel.

While the intentions of the filmmakers might have been to go back into the past, they were clearly not anticipating the 2022 Supreme Court overturning of the legislation.

STEVE JOBS: THE LOST INTERVIEW

US, 2012, 70 Minutes, Colour.  

Steve Jobs, Robert X. Cringley. 

Directed  by Paul Sen.

Steve Jobs died in 2011 at the age of 56. He is considered one of the leading minds and influences of the 20^th century.

Have been many documentaries about him, his background, a precocious young man, his friendship with Steve was now ski, their working in a garage, interest in computers, leading to all kinds of inventiveness, the Apple Company, the Macintosh computer…

And there have been several feature film interpretations of Jobs in his life, portrayed by Ashton future as well as Benedict Cumberbatch.

The 70 minute documentary is a one-on-one interview between Steve Jobs and Robert X.Cringely, directed by Paul Sen. It was filmed in 1995, the year that Jobs turned 40. It offered him an opportunity to look back on his own life, the influences, friendships, his business knowledge and effectiveness, the experience with John Scully whom he brought in from PepsiCo, Jobs being ousted from Apple and his managing the company, NeXT (which was bought by Apple just after this interview).

While it is simply the camera photographing jobs with questions from Cringely, it is well worth seeing, Jobs having quite a pleasant manner of being photographed, not rushing in was prepared answers, taking time to consider and answer, acknowledging some limitations, but also self-confident. He had an extraordinarily shrewd business sense which, after this film, served him in very good stead. He had demands on people, saying that the work was what was most important, and that if the work is not up to standard, he should be critical and make demands.

For audiences interested in the development of computers, leading to the PCs and laptops and the latter part of the 20^th century, there is a whole lot of detail here which can be listened to in the light of the extraordinary developments since the interview.

The interview was done to have sections for a documentary series on Nerds! But, it seems that the interview was lost. Over 15 years later, after Jobs death, a VHS copy was found in the garage and this interview released for television in 2012. Which enables it to have a small postscript indicating the achievements of Steve Jobs in the last 15 years of his life.

Many audiences, looking out and listening to Steve Jobs, unvarnished, may well have a more sympathetic response to him than they might have had previously.

ALL THE DEVIL'S MEN

US, 2019, 99 minutes, Colour.

Milo Gibson, Sylvia Hoeks, Gbenga Akinnagbe, Joseph Millson, Elliot Cowan, William Fichtner.

Directed by Matthew Hope.

This is what might be called a standard action film – but it should please action fans, the straightforward story but with twists, tough types, the background of the CIA, bounty Hunter assassins, betrayals, memories of the wars in Afghanistan, money and greed.

The film is also a star vehicle for Milo Gibson, the sixth child of Mel Gibson, who had appeared in his father’s Australian film, Hacksaw Ridge. At times audiences will notice the resemblance, the build, the look and I…

Dutch actress Sylvia hoax moved to Hollywood and here is the CIA handler.

The implications of the plot are that there is a need for CIA surveillance and targets – however, there are quite a number of questions of morality as well is the repercussions on the moral life of the assassin and consequences for his family.

1. Standard action adventure, especially for action fans?
2. The CIA, hired assassins, plots and conspiracies, espionage and counter-espionage?
3. The background of CIA agents, military, Afghanistan and other wars of the 21^st-century, dangers, excitement, thrills, sacrificing families, harsh decisions, saving each other, greed motivations, betrayals? War junkies turned bounty hunters?
4. The opening in Marrakesh, Morocco atmosphere, Jack Collins getting up, exercise, communication, the command, driving, weapons, the setup, assassinating the target, escaping?
5. Leigh, her background, the death of her father, against McBride, the bond with Jack Collins, her concern, one last chance? The mission in London?
6. The members of the team, the flight, Mike, the veteran, sardonic? Pete, the Shadow Warrior, wary of Jack? The banter?
7. The team in London, the target, the photos, Jack recognising Deighton? The meeting, the talk, the memories? Deighton and his connections? The promises?
8. The bulk of the film as action, Deighton and his betrayal, Jack and Pete and their response, shootouts? The issue of McBride, the nuclear warhead, doing the deal, selling to the Russians, the meeting, the money? His pressure on Deighton? His background with Leigh’s father?
9. The betrayals, Leigh and her mistrust of Collins, the meeting with Deighton, the deal, meeting up with him? Collins and Pete, the pursuits, shootouts, Pete wounded, dying? Collins taking Deighton’s car and driver, Deighton assuming Collins was dead?
10. The buildup to the confrontation, with Deighton, the shootouts?
11. McBride, the plane, getting on board, the nuclear warhead, the confrontation by Collins and Leigh, the car blocking the plane, Leigh and her demands, McBride shooting her, Colin shooting McBride?
12. Getting the plane, his wanting to go home, family?

THOR: LOVE AND THUNDER

Australia/US, 2022, 119 minutes, Colour.

Chris Hemsworth, Natalie Portman, Christian Bale, Tessa Thompson, Taika Waititi, Russell Crowe, Jaimie Alexandre, Chris Pratt, Dave Bautista, Karen Gillan, Pom Klementief, Sean Gunn, Vin Diesel, Bradley Cooper, Ben Falcone, Melissa McCarthy, Matt Damon, Luke Hemsworth, Sam Neill, Simon Russell Beale, Stephen Curry, Idris Elba, Kate Denning.

Directed by Taika Waititi.

For 10 years and more Chris Hemsworth has been the Marvel Universe embodiment of Thor (for his own films, appearing in four Avengers movies, and guesting in a number of video games and shorts). More recently it looks as if Thor has been taking it far too easily, lazy, putting on weight. Now he has to go through a health and fitness regime again so that he can combat the archvillain, Gorr, whose mission is to destroy all the gods. Gorr kidnaps the children from the city of Asgard (now a tourist attraction even with a sideshow play about Odin, Thor and Loki – managed by Ben Falcone, his wife, Melissa McCarthy, playing the Mother, Hela, Sam Neill as Oden, Luke Hemsworth (fair enough) as Thor and, of all people, with two comparatively brief scenes, Matt Damon as Loki! And the town, peaceable, is ruled over by Valkyrie (Tessa Thompson).

The opening is particularly serious, eliciting some compassion for Gorr, wandering the desert with his young daughter who dies, confronting selfish gods in an oasis and going on a mission of destruction. He is a villain, but we sympathise with what he has gone through – and he is played, very seriously by Christian Bale.

Seriously is not exactly the word comes to mind with Chris Hemsworth enjoying himself as Thor – somebody remarked about his goofiness and that seems a good word to describe his tongue-in-cheek humorous approach to his character. He teams up again with his first love, scientist Jane Foster (Natalie Portman) who wants to join with him in his exploits, hoping that this will control her terminal cancer. And, director, Taika Waititi, is back again as the stone creature, along with his New Zealand iccent (this reviewer having a New Zealand grandfather feels free to make accent jokes and references).

In fact, as the narrative goes along, there is a lot of farce introduced. This is especially the case with the surprise appearance of Russell Crowe as Zeus, the king of the gods, with his special effects lightning rod (and, a strange Greek-Australian accent which might remind older audiences of television’s, Con the fruiterer!).

So, there is quite a deal of comedy, quite a number of battles, but in the accent of Taika Waititi, it is often quite ‘a but sully’.

It has drawn audiences in all around the world – but its main appeal will be to the Marvel Universe fans and those whose funnybone is quickly and easily tickled. For those whose funnybone is rather resistant to tickling, somebody said it was Thorful!

1. The Marvel Universe, the place of Thor, the Nordic gods, his coming to earth in previous stories, his roaming the universe, his relaxing and getting out of fitness, his being called back to action?
2. The various locations of the Marvel Universe, the harsh desert and the oasis of the ruthless king? Asgard, Thor’s home, the city, tourist attraction, ruled by Valkyerie? The abducted children? The realm of Zeus, lavish, action? The confrontation between Gorr and Thor and Jane? Saving the children?
3. The strong cast, even to guest appearances from major stars?
4. The tone of the opening, Gorr in the desert, his daughter dying, lack of water, the oasis, expecting help, his being despised, his turning against the gods, vengeance, the Butcher? His taking the children, holding them in captivity? The buildup to the confrontation with Thor, with Jane, the fighting, vanquished?
5. Chris Hemsworth as Thor, audiences enjoying his performances, tongue-in-Chief, the goofy moments, not taking himself too seriously? Remembering his past and his heritage? Memories of Jane from the first film? The reappearance, it will, getting the hammer, costume, wanting to join him, to rescue the children, the effect on her, her hopes that it would overcome her cancer?
6. Thor going to Asgard, the hammer and his being transported to the children, their story? His getting the help of Val Keary? Korg, Rock creature, New Zealand accent, the comedy of the writer-director, his falling apart and gathering himself together? Advice, companionship?
7. The time in Asgard, the tourists, the fair, entertainment? The play about Odin and his sons? The irony of Matt Damon as Loki, having Luke Hemsworth as Thor, Sam Neill is Odin, Ben Falcone as promoter, Melissa McCarthy as Hela?
8. The decision to approach Zeus? The lavish court, diagnosis, Zeus and his self-image, costume? Russell Crowe as Zeus? And the Australian-Greek accent and its effect? Zeus’s pompous, his lightning, the confrontation with Thor, defeat?
9. Jane, the past, science, her friends and advice, the doctors, the cancer, her seeking out Thor, joining him, the battles, costume, the Hammer, victory but its effect on her?
10. The return of the children? Everybody happy? And the previews within the final credits, Zeus revived, Jane dead but her life after death? Thor returning?

SECRET OBSESSION

US, 2019, 97 minutes, Colour.

Brenda Song, Mike Vogel, Dennis Hayesbert, Ashley Scott, Paul Sloan, Daniel Booko.

Directed by Peter Sullivan.

While the development of this thriller has its twists, in fact, the title does give it away!

This is the story of an artist, her life, a night attack in a parking area, her being taken to hospital, amnesia. And then her devoted husband turns up and stays with her during her recovery, telling her the story of their marriage, providing photos, ever devoted.

He seems too good to be true!

There is a surprising sequence when a stranger comes to the door, who had witnessed something in the carpark, and the husband then attacks him and kills him, burying him in the garden.

The husband then becomes more and more paranoid – and the screenplay provides explanations of what it happened, his working in the same office as the young woman, her engagement and wedding, his obsession and jealousy, unable to approach her. But, then concocting the whole plot, killing the husband and the parents, changing the photos, taking over the mansion house is it for his… But, finally, is terrorising the young woman.

There is a very sympathetic detective played by Denis Hayesbert who pursues the investigation but almost becomes the victim of the obsessive man. But, this is an entertainment and so it ultimately turns out well.

Entertaining of its kind.

1. Expectations of the thriller? The mystery, the woman and her being attacked, hospital, amnesia? The husband? The detective? Loving behaviour, erratic behaviour, the murder of the man outside the house?… The obsession?
2. Northern California, the beauty of the mountain countryside, the town of the sheriff’s office, hospital, the mansion and interiors, grounds? Musical score?
3. Introducing the theme, Jennifer, in the car park, the threats, the bewilderment, the car, the crash? Waking up in hospital? Russell, his arrival, with the nurse, intruding, at the bedside, staying with Jennifer during her recovery, bringing her home to the mansion, installing her in the mansion? Her loss of memory, glimpses? The photos, Russell and his stories, care, her believing him? Recovering, the walking stick, the house of life in the house?
4. The detective, his own story, the death of the little girl, buying the toys? Working with his team? Interviews, Russell, the clues, investigations, the wrong address, finding the mansion? In the grounds, Russell hitting him, in the freezer, his escape, following Jennifer and Russell, the fight with Russell? The aftermath and his giving the toys to charity?
5. Russell, his story, charming, the photos, his memories? The man loitering outside and his killing him, burying the body? The aggressive moments towards Jennifer, apologies? Locking her up, chaining her foot? Attacking the detective, putting him in the freezer? Jennifer loose, chasing her, the threats, her shooting him?
6. The gradual revelation of the truth, Russell in the workplace, his temper, jealousy of the true Russell, the setup, killing the husband, the parents, the set up with Jennifer, towing the car, arriving at the hospital? The scenes of the past, Jennifer and her fiance, Russell observing? The obsession?
7. Popular ingredients, audience expectations, satisfied?

BRIAN BANKS

US, 2018, 99 minutes, Colour.

Aldis Hodge, Greg Kinnear, Sherri Shepherd, Melanie Liburd, Tiffany Dupont, Xosha Roquemore, Monique Grant, Morgan Freeman.

Directed by Tom Shadyac.

This film was based on a true story, Brian Banks, a young African-American football player, moving towards professional status, 2002. At school, there is an episode with the young woman, Brian backing off, the young woman caught by a school superintendent who puts the idea of rape in her mind. Brian is arrested, goes to trial, is urged to make a plea by the lawyer but the judge sentences them to 6 years imprisonment. We see him in prison, resentful, then influenced for the good by a prison adviser, Jerome Jefferson (played by an uncredited Morgan Freeman).

The film opens with Brian coming out of prison, under strict parole supervision, California legislation changing and his having to wear an ankle signal, preventing him then from playing football. Nor can he get a job.

The other main character in the film is Justin Brooke, played by Greg Kinnear. Brooke was a lawyer who is interested in cases where those accused were treated unjustly, looking again at the Lord to help them. Brian Banks appeals to him but is put off because there is no new and compelling evidence.

Brian is supported by his loyal mother, by some members of Brooks staff. When the accusing young woman appears, Brian interviews her in the presence of a lawyer, taping her, she admitting the truth. However, this is also inadmissible and she later denies what she said.

There is quite some emotion in the dramatising of this story, audience sympathy, Brian is sincere, but as an underdog, a victim of the law. However, Brooke becomes more involved, approaches the DA, and the case is heard again, difficulty with time because of Brian’s parole period ending and the inability for the case to be reintroduced.

The film is a star vehicle for Aldis Hodge who is persuasive in the central role. Greg Kinnear is always reliable. And, it is a pleasure to see the cameo by Morgan Freeman.

The film was directed by Tom Shadyac who began his career with comedies like Ace Ventura and Lliar, Liar with. He made quite a mark with his comedy, Bruce Almighty, again with an Jennifer Aniston and Morgan Freeman playing God. This was taken up again in Evan Almighty with Steve Carell.

A humanitarian story.

1. A true story? Miscarriage of justice? A prison sentence? Attempts to rectify the situation?
2. The setting in the to thousands, football, training and matches, prospects? School, the compromising situation, the accusation? The court, the trial, Bryan in prison, over the years, release, reporting in, the leg signal, trying to get jobs, trying for justice?
3. The portrait of Brian banks, the final credits, the photos of the actual Brian banks, of Justin and other members of the story?
4. The background, Brian at school, his prospects, the coaches, his being praised for his sports skills? The encounter with knish, mutual consent, breaking off, knish and the encounter with the supervisor, her story, words put in her mouth? Brian and his relationship with his mother, her support? The arrest, the humiliation, prison, in court, the advice of the lawyer, to make a deal and plea, the decision of the judge? The years in prison, the harshness, the cell, the other prisoners, witnessing the killing, punching and breaking the jaw of the assailant, in solitary? The effect of solitary, the classes by Jerome Johnson, the gift of the book, getting into think, focusing on interiority? The strong influence, change of heart?
5. Brian, on release, parole, the strict interpretation of the parole officer, putting on the device on his leg, unable to play football, trying to get jobs, not to go near schools and parks, putting up the barriers, warm to go away?
6. Justin Brooks, career, assistance, lectures, knowledge of the law, taking on causes? The issue of compelling evidence, new evidence, habeas corpus, the discussions with Brian, unable to help? Yet sympathetic? The assistance, their willingness to discuss with Brian? Brian telling his story, writing to the DA, Habeas Corpus and the rejection? Presenting the case to the group? Ideas? The issue of the school hallway, nobody hearing the alleged abduction? Justin later going, filming?
7. Brian, the plea, pressure on Justin, just in talking with the DA, the possibilities of reopening the case?
8. The appointment with the DA, the police holding up Brian, hurrying to the meeting? Persuasive? Is mother support?
9. Going to the lawyer, out of LA jurisdiction, the reaction of the parole officer? The lawyer, knish and the discussion, filmed, admitting the truth? Brian showing this to Justin, inadmissible? The pressure from her mother?
10. The case going to court again, knish and her mother and the interview, knish and denying everything, walking out? The hearing, the plea, the role of the DA, the decision of the judge?
11. The aftermath, the final credits, Justin and his work, Bryan and his contribution? The issue of sport, the coaches, training, too old to be accepted, finally finding a team, playing in the top league at 28?

AGAINST THE ICE

Iceland/Denmark, 2022, 184 minutes, Colour.

Nikolaj Coster-Waldau, Joe Cole, Charles Dance, Sam Redford, Ed Speelers.

Directed by Peter Flinth.

Audiences who value true stories about courageous expeditions will enjoy this film. It takes its place with films and documentaries about the Arctic and Antarctic expeditions of the late 19^th century and the beginning of the 20^th century. One thinks of explorers like Amundson, Shackleton, Scott. Given the hardships of the seasons, ice and snow, isolation, they are extraordinary stories.

This film is set in 1910, an initial expedition in the Arctic querying the claim by the US, Robert period, that there was water separating Greenland from other Arctic islands. The initial pioneers discover the truth, left information in it can, but died. And you expedition was undertaken by Ejnar Mikkelson who wanted to complete the search, found the dead explorers, and their information in the rock can. It was a dangerous expedition and nobody wanted to volunteer except the young mechanic, Iver Iversen, played by Joe Cole. The film, cowritten by its star, Nikolaj Coster-Waldau, who plays Mikkelson, shows the passing of time, the number of days over a period of three years.

The scenery, from Greenland and Iceland, is magnificent in its snow and ice skates. The film details the dangers of the expedition, the sleds, accidents, the dogs, having to kill the dogs, the dog meat, an encounter with a polar bear, the weather… Mikkelson finds the can and the message, completes the trip, makes his own report, but leaves it in a can and has to go back to retrieve it.

There are some scenes with Danish politicians, led by a very arrogant-style Charles Dance. Unwillingness to finance an expedition to find the explorers, the posting of a reward, the final discovery of the men after a three-year absence. And there are acclaimed as heroes.

The film is based on a book by Mikkelson himself. With the final credits there are photos of the men, photos of ice camps. The film record of an important Danish expedition.

1. A true story? Polar exploration at the beginning of the 20^th century? Arctic, Antarctic? Difficult expeditions? Doomed expeditions? Political implications?
2. The period, the settings in Copenhagen, official offices, meetings? The contrast with the vast Arctic ice escapes, mountains, lakes, frozen? The film immersing the audience in the Arctic? The musical score? And the opera and popular songs on phonographs of the time?
3. Expeditions in Greenland, Denmark and the ownership of Greenland, period and the US expedition, claiming part of Greenland? This expedition proving Greenland was a total country, under Denmark? The first expedition, lost, discovering the Can, the information? The deaths of the pioneers?
4. The new expedition, Ejnar Mikkelsen, Captain, the ship, modern advances, the discussions about the Titanic (and, after three years, discovering that it had sunk)? A stern man, the harshness of the expedition, the lieutenant and his journey, frozen toes, cutting them? Mickelson and his wanting to go to search for the missing pioneers, no one volunteering, Iver and his background as a mechanic, no experience in the Arctic?
5. The bulk of the film is the journey, the numbering of the days, over a three-year period? The captain and his experience, either and his learning? Age difference? The sleds, the travel, clothes, food, the maps, compass? The difficulties, storms and whether, the attack of the bear, overwhelming Mickelson, into the ice and water, either calling him out? The shooting of the bear? The finding of the cairn, the information? Continuing on, reaching the destination, the discovery of the geography, no sea passage?
6. The return journey, hardships, the dogs, shooting the dogs, the dog meat, sickness? On foot? Leaving the key in? Walking, arriving, discovering the expedition had departed? The huts, the supplies, free year? Settling in, the food, the gramophone?
7. The hallucinations, the photo of the women, Mikkelsen and his imagination, increasing, the conversations with her? Either and his seeing his grandfather, premonition of death? The struggles, piercing the boil on Mickelson’s neck, mental condition, the struggle, the fight?
8. The scenes with the Danish politicians, the plea for an expedition, being turned down? The suggestion of a reward? The ultimate expedition, the two men and confronting the expedition with guns? The return?
9. Copenhagen, heroes, haircut and shave, new clothes, the ceremony, the political speech of the politician, heroes?
10. The film based on the book by Mickelson himself, the photos, the friendship between the two men?