FILTH: THE MARY WHITEHOUSE STORY

UK, 2008, 90 minutes, Colour.
Julie Walters, Hugh Bonneville, Alun Armstrong, Ron Cook, Georgie Glen.
Directed by Andy De Emmony.

A BBC film shown on television but an interesting look back at the discussions about media and the need to clean up television in the last decades of the 20th century. Mary Whitehouse became a household name in the 1960s and she continued to be a figure of controversy (and mockery) until her death in 2001.

Since one of the main targets of her campaigns was the BBC itself, especially its director general 1960-1060, Sir Hugh Carleton Greene, it is surprising that the BBC produced the film and that it attempts a more even-handed approach to its portrait of Mary Whitehouse. In fact, if anyone wanted to sue it would be Hugh Greene who does not come out of the film too well at all. The screenplay was written by Amanda Coe.

The principal strength of the film is Julie Walters’ performance as Mrs Whitehouse. It is a familiar enough kind of character for Julie Walters but she invests Mary Whitehouse with some humanity, a sense of ordinariness at home with her husband, Ernest, as well as showing her convictions in her campaigns and her singlemindedness and the effect that so much limelight had on her. The suggestion is that she started to believe a bit in her own publicity and celebrity status. She was accused of being a ‘self-appointed’ guardian of morals.

Julie Walter’s portrayal is well worth seeing. Alun Armstrong is also humane as Ernest, always supportive of his wife and very much affected by the tragic accident he was involved in when a man lay in a bag on the road to commit suicide and it was Ernest Whitehouse who ran into him.

On the other hand, Hugh Bonneville, who is very good, has to make Hugh Greene an impersonal bureaucrat who refused to meet Mary Whitehouse and insulted her grossly behind her back while being a roving eye boss. He felt he had a mission to transform the BBC into a modern era company with programs which reflected the frankness of the times, something that Mrs Whitehouse could not agree with, especially programs that were available at times of children’s viewing. Hugh Greene might have done better in confrontations with Mrs Whitehouse where opinions could be expressed and argued instead of a stand-off with snide remarks on his side and narrow/sheltered views on hers with examples that sometimes led to ridicule rather than reasoned discussion.

The clash was between freedom of expression and community standards and the protection of children. Obviously many of the issues Mary Whitehouse raised are still important. Each generation has to face the same issues in its own way. While personalities can highlight these issues in the public mind for good or for ill, when personalities become the subject of discussion, the issue can be lost in slanging matches.

Filth shows the campaigns, the thousands of people who were concerned about media standards, the rallies, the debates, the opposition, the television mockery of Mary Whitehouse in programs like Swizzlewick. It is a film that can foster discussion of contemporary media problems of content and programming.

1.An effective telemovie? The fact that the BBC made it and the history of Mrs Whitehouse and her attacks on the BBC?

2.The style, narrative, conflict? The Whitehouses, Hugh Greene and the BBC? The campaigns, their growth, Birmingham meeting? The television programs and clips, especially Swivelwick?

3.Julie Walters, her screen presence, performance? Contrasting with Hugh Bonneville – and the seeming caricature of Sir Hugh Greene? Alun Armstrong as Ernest Whitehouse?

4.How even-handed was the screenplay? The perspective on the issues? On Mary Whitehouse and her campaign, on the perspectives of the BBC and opening up entertainment? The perspective from changes in society in Britain in the ensuing decades?

5.The situation of the 60s, changes? Religion and the Honest to God debate? Television and Hugh Greene and changes, programs, frankness in expression, programs on premarital sex, children watching, their being screened at mealtime? The clash between fears of corruption of society and freedom of speech? Issues of taste, refinement?

6.Mary Whitehouse and her sheltered background, middle-class, comfortable, her middle-class reactions? Her ignorance about sexuality? Sexual behaviour? Her attitude towards language?

7.Mary Whitehouse and her age, her relationship with Ernest and love for him? Her teaching art, her sons at home, her relationship with her students, encouraging them? Home style, the housewife life, prayer, friends with the vicar, her own friends? Her reaction to the television, turning off programs? Her motivation? The campaign, her initiative, support from friends? Was it true that she was self-appointed? Complaints to the BBC and reactions to these?

8.The film showing the campaign, the meetings, interactions, interviews with the media, the build-up to the Birmingham meeting and her decision to have it in the big hall, her nervousness, Ernest encouraging her, the crowds turning up, her speech, the hecklers? David Turner, the author of Trevor? His wanting equal time and her condemning him? The media response? The support of the people? Ernest and his throwing out the hecklers? David Turner and his writing of Swivelwick, insulting her, insulting Ernest – and her anger at this program?

9.The episodes with the sons, the women set up to provoke them? Their not responding?

10.The meeting and Ernest going to pick up Mary, the suicide man on the road, Ernest running over him, the shattering experience, the police, the man wanting to die? The effect on the family, the TV and the mockery of Ernest, the headlines?

11.Mary at home, the huge piles of letters, Ernest and the friends helping her, the growth of the Clean Up TV? The visit to London, the interview with Lord Hill, his courteous treatment of her, the later interactions and Lord Hill’s severe behaviour towards Hugh Greene?

12.Hugh Greene, the BBC, the role of the government, the postmaster-general? The board? The director? Hugh Greene’s character, the touch of the caricature, his refusal to meet Mary Whitehouse, verbally insulting her? At home, the formal family dinner, his leering approach to his secretaries? The Picasso-like painting and his throwing darts at it? The authorities, his sneering? His interaction with writers, rejecting them?

13.David Turner, Trevor, the text of Swivelwick, the rejected author finding it, sending it to Mary Whitehouse? Her getting the parcel ready, sending it to the postmaster, the program being banned?

14.Lord Hill, Greene’s contempt of him, their arguments, the different backgrounds? Greene and his deciding to go? His final walk down the street?

15.The build-up of the campaign, Mary’s friends, going to the BBC for the discussion, the program, her being insulted, driving back afterwards? Her rejoicing at Hugh Greene’s departure?

16.The change in Mary Whitehouse? How much was she affected by the campaign? The limelight, the scene where she wanted the lights differently on her face? Her believing her own propaganda? Yet the effectiveness of what she did? The opposition?

17.Mary Whitehouse’s enemies, her friends? How fair was the film in its presentation of her and her campaign?

IRENE

France, 2009, 80 minutes, Colour.
Directed by Alain Cavalier.

Alain Cavalier has made films like Therese and Libera Me which are artificially staged, word-driven, usually poetic and symbolic and have a determined preference for contemplation over action.

Recently, as he has moved into his mid-70s and beyond, he has filmed himself as film-maker (the title of his 2005 film).

This time he peruses and reads from diaries of 1970-1972 and his love for and obsession with actress, Irene, who is terminally ill. This provides memories, nostalgia, much rumination about his feelings, his film-making processes in the past (with a clip from La Chamade with Catherine Deneuve embodying Irene) as well as contemporary films, his ageing, a severe fall on an escalator and, again, modern film-making.

Cavalier appears on screen several times but it is commentary and edited images that may be too specialised even for a French audiences and maybe too Gallic in tone, references and rhetorical style for world audiences, apart from cineastes. His low-key and mellow-aged voiceover runs the danger for the drowsy of being ultimately soporific.

1.The work of Alain Cavalier? His career? Films in old age?

2.The visual style, poetic, symbolic?

3.Cavalier and his preference for contemplation rather than action?

4.The autobiographical aspects of the film, his past, film-making, processes, the present, his ageing, his accident?

5.Cavalier as an older man, his work, his processes for filming, his remembering, the importance of the fall on the escalator?

6.Irene, the memories, the clip with Catherine Deneuve, describing her, her work, love for her, obsession, erotic? Her illness, her death, funeral?

7.The use of the diaries, the visualising of the diaries, reading from them in voice-over? The self-revelation?

8.The portrait of Cavalier in old age, film as a means of self-revelation?

VENGEANCE

Hong Kong, 2009, 108 minutes, Colour.
Johnny Hallyday, Sylvie Testud, Anthony Wong, Simon Yam.
Directed by Johnnie To.

Possibly the best Johnnie To crime drama. To is a prolific film-maker and, in recent years, most of his films have premiered at festivals in Cannes, Berlin or Venice. His international reputation is high and strong.

It was surprising the number of times that Shakespeare's name came to mind while watching vengeance. Of course, so many of Shakespeare's plays are revenge tragedies, a genre popular amongst the Elizabethan and, especially, Jacobean playwrights. But, it was not just the revenge. The audience had to ask questions about the reality and meaning of the bloodbaths, to look beneath the conventions of revenge tragedy for the human elements. Johnnie To's film is not one that glorifies the vengeance (which some other films from Hong Kong tend to do). The plot device of having a central character suffer memory loss with the hired killers asking what the meaning is of vengeance when the initiator does not know what is happening.

It was a very smart move to have a French connection for this story which takes place in Macau and Hong Kong. It offers greater access than usual to Western audiences. Sylvie Testud appears briefly as the widow of a man who is victim of hitmen. Her father is played by Johnny Halliday (in a role intended for Alain Delon who declined). Johnny Hallyday at the best of times can look alarmingly sinister. By coincidence, he witnesses three other hit men doing their deed in his fashionable Macau hotel and hires them to find his family's killers.

Johnnie To knows how to do action and intrigue and is never at a loss here. But the style, craft and polish of the film show an even greater flair than usual. The film looks very good. The opening killing has strong shock value. The recreation of the crime as Hallyday and his hired men examine the house works very well.

There are allusions to other films with a striking umbrella sequence, the hero losing his memory and taking photographs and labelling them in the same way as in Memento. It is Macbeth that comes to mind in a shootout as the hired men are surrounded by large bales of compressed garbage which hide the attackers, look as if they are moving by themselves and are moved like the trees of Burnham Wood advancing on Dunsinane. At the end of the revenge tragedy, there are very few left standing but the important thing is that order is seen to be restored. While it looks like a last man standing here, the film goes on to provide a pleasing hope for normality.

It is neatly written, well-acted and a very satisfying example of this kind of vengeance film.

1.The films of Johnnie To, Hong Kong and Macau crime dramas? This film – with its French connection?

2.The title, the revenge genre, more depth, more humanity, issue of revenge for its own sake? Its effect on the person wanting vengeance?

3.The Macau settings, the city, the outskirts, Hong Kong and its harbour, the buildings? Authentic atmosphere? Musical score?

4.The French characters, the link? Appeal for the West? For Hong Kong and Asia?

5.The introduction, the mother cooking, her family coming home, the shooting through the door, her husband and children being killed, her going to hospital? The later visualising of the crime as the four searched the house? Exploring what happened?

6.The introduction to Frank Costello, Johnny Hallyday and his reputation as singer, actor? His look? Tough and sinister? Arriving in Hong Kong, speaking French, changing to English? At the hospital, seeing his daughter, her indicating letters and words with her finger, three men as the killers, her wanting vengeance?

7.Going to the hotel, the set-up for the killing, his confronting the three hit men, his walking away and their letting him go? Making contact, meeting them, the proposal, giving them the money, the promise of the hotel? The competition and assembling the gun blindfold? The indication of his past crime career?

8.George Fung and the hired killers, his kissing his mistress, the language, his suspicions about her, the affair with the bodyguard? His hiring the team, sending them to kill the two? The name of Fung on the gun for Frank?

9.The killers going to see the cousin, getting information, who had the weapons, getting ammunition? The later confrontation of the cousin, his hanging, his death?

10.Discovering the truth, going to Hong Kong, the surveillance on the wharf, following the criminals, going to the forest, confrontation? The picnic, their wives and children? Being offered the food, not accepting?

11.The build-up to the shootout, the moon and the clouds? Their being wounded? Frank taken, healing, removing the bullet? The fat hit man and the removal of the bullet from his buttocks?

12.The three killers, their leader, always serious, the young man, follower, brash? The fat killer and his always being hungry? As characters?

13.Fung, his empire, his attitude towards his mistress, getting her killed? The phone call, the doctor and his treating the hit men? The attack on them, killing them? The company and its allegiance to Fung, changing to Frank? Because of the issues?

14.Frank, the issue of his loss of memories, writing the names on the photos, the reality of his loss of memory, amongst the umbrellas, lost in the street?

15.Fung, the attackers, in the room, the shootout on the fire escape, in the street?

16.The return to Macau, the cousin and his death? The confrontation with Fung’s men? The allusion to Macbeth – the compressed garbage piles and their moving and converging on the killers? Their deaths?

17.Frank and the children, their guardian, her pregnancy, having the meal? His loss of memory? The news, the men’s death? His prayer, his vigil, the ghosts appearing to him – in the Shakesperean vein?

18.The girl, dressed up and glamorous, seductive for Fung? Her pregnancy revealed? The children, the flags, the pasting on the jacket of the flags? Making Fung the target for Frank? The bullets and Frank making them fit, identifying Fung, killing him?

19.Order restored, Frank with the children, on the beach, with the mother, celebrating the meal?

20.The use of the revenge genre and its conventions? Hong Kong style? The polish and flair of the film? Its deeper allusions to other films, even Shakespeare?

VINCERE

Itay, 2009, 128 minutes, Colour.
Giovanna Mezzogiorno, Filippo Timi.
Directed by Marco Bellocchio.

Vincere, To win, to conquer, was a catch cry of Benito Mussolini, Il Duce, which rallied millions of Italian nationalists during the 1920s to the end of World War II. The film opens in 1914 with unionist, Mussolini, giving God five minutes to kill him. It took over 30 years for the partisans to do this.

After an awkward start, time and placewise, introducing Mussolini and Ida Dasler who became his lover and mother of his son, the film builds up the passion between the two, especially Ida's obsessive commitment to Mussolini, and the future Duce's personality, arrogance, bullying rhetoric, founding Il Popolo and his war service as well as being wounded on the front in 1915. Actor Filippo Timi portrays Mussolini in manner rather than in looks. However, after he assumes power and government, the film uses a great deal of actual footage of Il Duce himself rather than any performance. This becomes an extraordinary reminder of the histrionic style of Mussolini's speeches and self-confidence.

The film, while tracing Italian history during the era, including the Concordat with the Vatican and Italy's empire ambitions of the 1930s, is really about Ida Dalser. Giovanna Mezzogiorno gives an arresting and nuanced performance where she has to age thirty years.

Jealous of Mussolini's wife and paranoid about persecution and with delusions about Mussolini's love for her (so lengthily and intensely portrayed early in the film), she is confined, staying with a family in Trento, then deprived of her son (who dies in an institution aged 26), confined to asylums until she dies in 1937 of a cerebral haemorrhage. She insisted to the end that she was married to Mussolini and that he had acknowledged his son but she never produced the documentation.

So, this is a very sad film, not only with Mussolini's ultimate ruining of Italy and the alarming presentation of a nation embracing Fascism, but in the cruelty of Ida Dalser's internment, separation from her son and continued humiliation. Her story provides another, more personalised perspective on this significant period in Italian history.

1.Audience knowledge of Benito Mussolini, his background, career, his influence on the 20th century, World War Two, Italy in ruins?

2.1914 to 1945, Italy, Milan, socialist meetings, the war, pro-war and anti-war demonstrations? The domestic history of Italy? Politics? Relationship with the Catholic church? Mental institutions? The film recreating a sense of the period? Musical score?

3.The title, Mussolini’s slogan? Seeing him in action, his defying God (wanting God to destroy him within five minutes)? The reprise of this theme at the end? Initially a socialist, his participation in demonstrations, fleeing the police, the encounter with Ida? The editor of Avanti? The rhetoric of his speeches, his histrionic behaviour? In favour of the war? Becoming more bellicose? His arguments, the socialist meeting and Ida trying to get in, listening in? His being sacked from Avanti? Ousted from the unions? The founding of Il Populo, Ida selling her furniture to pay for it? The range of newsreels, the war, the audience shouting, the brawls? Mussolini’s service in the war, his being injured, return, in hospital? His saying he could have a change of mind? The showing of the film Cristos on the roof of the hospital, the crucifixion scene, the focus on Mary? The king arriving, praising him? Seeing the Black Shirts in action, their patriotism, his being influenced by them, leading them? His behaviour as an actor?

4.1922, the newsreel footage, Mussolini’s look, his political behaviour, his ruthless behaviour, the crowds in Piazza Venezia, calling him Il Duce, the signing of the concordat with Pius XI? The 30s and the dream of empire, the Mediterranean? World War Two, his death?

5.His personal story, being rescued by Ida, listening to her, love, infatuation? Her falling in love with him? Her commitment? His inability to say that he loved her? The time with her, passionate? His relationship with Rachel, marrying her, the children, Edda and her mother’s visit in hospital? Ida’s jealousy? In the hospital, the fight between the women? Rachel as protective? The marriage between Ida and Mussolini – visualised, her imagination or reality? Her not providing the documentation?

6.Mussolini abandoning her, Ida and her relationship with her son, overprotective? Her defence?

7.Her growing protest, shouting, anger, her love for her son, confined with the family, Ricardo looking after her? Her son being taken, going to the nuns, to the school? His growing up and his mother not seeing him? The military school, his studies, his becoming a sailor, his imitating Mussolini? Seeing Ricardo, writing the letter to his mother? His being interned, the information about his death at twenty-six?

8.The family and their kindness, Ricardo and his advice? The police raid, Ida being interned, the way she was treated, with the staff, with the nuns? Bernardi and his power of attorney, his cruelty towards Ida, not letting her see her son? The portrait of the various inmates, the ballet dancer, their advice for Ida to behave herself? The various transfers? The years passing, her writing the letters? The letter from her son, the compassionate nun, changing habit, Ida escaping, meeting the family, arrested? Interned, her death? The pathos?

9.The doctors, their treatment, the sympathetic doctor and his advice to her to be calm?

10.Communications developments in the 20th century, newspapers, giving way to cinema, newsreels, the movies? The Cristos being shown on the roof in the hospital? Charlie Chaplin and The Kid and Ida’s tears? The Italian epics of the 20s and 30s? The transition to a new world and the technologies for World War Two?

11.The finale, Ida’s death, an image of Italy – and Mussolini leaving Italy in ruins?

INDEPENDENCIA

Philippines, 2009, 77 minutes, Black and white and Colour.
Sid Lucero, Alessandra de Rossi.
Directed by Raya Martin.

A 76 minute experiment for director, Raya Martin. Filmed in black and white on colour stock, the chosen cinematic styles is rudimentary (primitive, one might say). Simple takes with minimum movement, actual locations in front of set backdrops, basic narrative editing, an episodic plot with stolid-looking and sounding performances. It is as if this might have been a way of filming at the time of the events (at the end of the 19th century), the takeover by the United States of the Philippines.

There is a jolting experience midway through the action when it seems the film has broken and burned in the projector. But, it moves to what is designed as an old-fashioned community service commercial, soldiers shooting a young boy in the market place after he has stolen an egg, with military reassurance to the public that the law is active and protecting the citizens. Then back to the narrative several years later.

The tale is of a mother and son who take refuge from invasion in a house in the forest, settle, find a girl who has been raped by some Americans. Mother dies. Woman gives birth. This before the 'intermission'. The family passes the years in their primitive home, talking of legends and hopes.

Some colour appears just at the end but there seems to be little hope offered for independence. The title seems one of yearning.

1.A cinema experiment? Black and white photography, rudimentary techniques, the focused shots, the long takes, the jungle and the sets, the style of the performances, the story?

2.The opening, the celebration in the village, the need for independence from the Spanish, the invasion of the Americans? The late 19th century, early 20th century?

3.The mother and the son, the decision to go into the jungle, finding their hut, settling in, the son unable to kill the boar? The mother and the plants? The forest, finding the girl (and hearing the voices of the Americans), the rape? The visualising of the dreams, the sensuality of the young man, the girl and the hostility with the mother? His being alone, sexual needs? The girl and her becoming part of the family? The mother, getting sick and dying? The girl giving birth?

4.The sudden interlude, the film breaking down, the boy in the marketplace, stealing, being shot, the soldier reassuring the people about law and order – like a later commercial?

5.The second part, the boy growing up, his age, the father hunting, the family surviving? Talking about the legends, his grandfather and the snakes, the amulet and trying to find it? Hoping for protection? The changes in their life, in the towns, the Americans taking over?

6.The Americans in the forest, the boy, following him?

7.The boy, the colour, on the cliff, his death? Symbolic of the old ways and the American takeover? The pessimism? The making of such a film as a sign of hope?

THE TSAR

Russia, 2009, 116 minutes, Colour.
Pyotr Mamanov, Oleg Yankovsky.
Directed by Pavel Lungen.

In the middle of this film, some of the Tsar's soldiers are put in an arena to fight an enormous bear. The bear is filmed towering above the men (and the audience), a spectacular, vast, powerhouse of energy with the potential to overwhelm all who stand in its way (and it does). It is an apt metaphor for this huge Russian powerhouse of a film, one that overwhelms its audience.

The Tsar in question is Ivan the Terrible (already the subject of Eisenstein's classics). It is the middle of the 16th century, that terrible century for religious upheaval and persecution, Catholics and the Reformed, in Western Europe and in massacres in the New World. It seems from The Tsar to have been even more horrific in Russia and for victims in the Orthodox Church.

The plot of this film is reminiscent of the story of Henry II of England and Thomas a'Beckett. Here, Ivan has been dominating Russia and fighting the Poles with the help of his ruthless special army. The Metropolitan Bishop flees for his life. Ivan appoints Felipp, a monk who was a childhood friend, as his successor and expected puppet cleric.

The film is divided into chapters, opening with the Tsar's prayer, an apocalyptic reading of the Book of Revelation and the last times. It continues into the Tsar's sacrifice and an alarming section where the Tsar inspects a fairground of inventions of torture. Felipp is welcomed as Metropolitan but has to stand by and witness Ivan's atrocities and blood lust (with more than a mad glint in the Tsar's eye), including the arena and the murderous bear. Felipp has to take a stand and, like Becket, he will be persecuted and killed.

The film, widescreen, is huge, colourful, spectacular, full of religious imagery, sequences which are iconic, drawing on the art traditions of Orthodoxy and the Russian masters. The score is forceful-orchestral. These are horrible, legendary times and this is communicated over almost two hours.

In that sense, the film is not for the fainthearted – and yet, it communicates this phase of history, the violent use of power and the challenge of religion better than any history lecture.

1.The impact of the film: visual, sound, performances, themes?

2.The immense widescreen colour spectacle, action, contemplation?

3.The religious imagery, icons and paintings, churches and monasteries? The images of Mary? The crucifix? In the 16th century context? The verbal religious imagery, the Book of Revelation, Psalm 91? The prayers? The images and prayers of the martyrs and saints?

4.The chapters, prayer, war, sacrifice, fairground? Perspectives on Ivan the Terrible?

5.The introduction and the information about the 16th century, Ivan becoming tsar of all the Russians, his wars, Poland, Islam, his cruelty, his special team of troops, the severed heads of dogs?

6.Ivan, the performance, his appearance, praying the Book of Revelation, the end times? The ritual of his being clothed, going to the people? His entourage? Riding into battle, the fights? His clash with the church, the flight of the Metropolitan? His decision about Philip? Called terrible, cruel?

7.The village, the attack, taking away the lord, the cage, the little girl, her running away? Her being with Philip? Ivan’s interest in her, taking her to the court, fostering her – and letting her die in the arena because of the bear?

8.Philip as a monk, travelling, his nephew and his being an official, an old school friend of Ivan? His choice for the Metropolitan? His declining, the pressure, acceptance, the ceremonial? Vesting? His presentation to the people and their receiving him?

9.Philip and his duties as Metropolitan? His stance on the religious wars? Expected to bless Ivan and the troops? The fight against the Poles? His reaction to the atrocities? The entourage, the mad fool and his apocalyptic language? The chiefs, their torture, being killed by Ivan, put into the arena with the bears? The little girl and her running down, her death? His walking into the arena with the icon of Mary? The confrontation with the bear? His being condemned, Ivan’s reaction, the false charges, magic, treason? His nephew tortured on the rack? His death? Philip and the humiliation? Ivan sparing his life, confining him to the monastery, chained? The drink out of his reach? Mary, the icon, his prayer? The chains coming loose, the miracle, restoring sight to the monk?

10.The visualising of the wars, the Poles, the battle at the bridge?

11.Ivan, his life, intensity, his wife and her frivolity, his reaction to treason, the cruelty of the bears in the arena?

12.His treatment of Philip, condemnation?

13.The atrocities of the fairground, the German inventor, the mad fool illustrating the aspects of torture? The devices for torture?

14.His confessing to Philip, Philip refusing to give him absolution? Leaving his assistant to condemn Philip after the kiss? The assistant and his plea for a miracle for his son? The murder of Philip? The monks and their decision to stay, the stance of the superior, burying Philip, defying the assistant, being burnt in the church?

15.The mad fool, his burning, Ivan sending his wife to a convent?

16.Finally alone, asking where his people were? No-one coming?

17.Image and symbols for the history of Russia? For the period, later? Power, absolute power, abuse, violence, bloodlust? The role of church, religion, the orthodox?

PRECIOUS

US, 2009, 109 minutes, Colour.
Gabourey Sidibe, Mo’nique Paula Patten, Mariah Carey, Sherri Shepherd, Lenny Kravatz.
Directed by Lee Daniels.

Based on an award-winning novel by poet and essayist, Sapphire, from her time as a social worker and teacher with deprived and abused children, Push, this is a very moving film about a subject with which moviegoers will be familiar. But, here it is presented so well and movingly.

The basic narrative is straightforward: the late 1980s, a completely dysfunctional family in the Bronx, where the pregnant 16 year old Claireece Precious Jones (already the mother of a daughter who has Downs Syndrome) by her father, lives with her indolent and abusive mother. One of the distinguishing features of the film is that at moments of deep hurt and crisis, Precious retreats into her imagination where she is beautiful, successful and admired. These imaginings the audience is privy to. But Precious is a very big girl, very big and this causes insults to be poured on her.

Praised by her maths teacher and supported, though at first quite ungratefully, by the principal, Precious is advised to go to a special Each/Teach organisation run by Miss Blu Rain, an elegantly beautiful, intelligent and sensitive woman.

The rest of the plot might be anticipated but it is seeing Gabourey Sidibe's performance and her eliciting our interest and sympathy that makes the film worthwhile. The other performances are also strong: comedienne Mo'nique as the slatternly mother, Paula Patton as Miss Rain, singer Lennie Kravitz as a male nurse and Mariah Carey as the social supervisor.

The screenplay pulls very few punches: school behaviour, violence at home, incest, teenage pregnancy and motherhood, childbirth, choices for adoption or opportunity for development, illiteracy, lack of self-esteem, lesbianism, racism. But, this is all presented with such conviction and compassion that it wins audience hearts and minds.

1.Familiar material but the fine presentation, exploration, characterisation?

2.The author of the novel, her experience in teaching, social work, drawing on that background? Similar to Miss Rain in the film?

3.The Bronx, 1987, the streets and the neighbourhood, the ghetto atmosphere, race issues, the apartments, school? A sense of realism?

4.The opening with the fantasy and the glamour, Precious and her imagination, glamour, success, being loved? The introduction and her fairy godmother, the red scarf (and later giving it to the little girl in the office)? Songs, dances, the awards ceremony? These fantasy inserts at desperate moments in Precious’s experience?

5.Push as the title of the novel, birth, push in life? The use of the title, Precious?

6.Clareece and her being the film’s anchor? A portrait of Clareece, her appearance, large, heavy, pregnant, sixteen? Her mother talking about abortions? Her father and the rapes? Having her daughter, Down Syndrome? Her grandmother and the care for the child? At home, doing the cooking, being insulted by her mother? At school, her imagination with the teacher, her being mocked? Her flair for maths, the teacher praising her? Her prospects?

7.Being called to the principal, sullen, her pregnancy, questions about her mother? Her father? The principal’s visit at night, talking, the proposal, her mother’s negative reaction?

8.Going to the office, the woman at the desk, meeting Miss Rain, her being sick, deciding to go for the lessons? The girls in the class, racial background, Jamaican, Italian, African American? Past drugs experience? Different ambitions, getting their stories, the colour, their talent? The classes and Precious becoming involved, the discussions, writing the journal, Precious and her learning to read with Miss Rain?

9.Miss Rain, her poise, her decision about Clareece, helping her, work with the class, the way she treated the girls, personal? Teaching Precious to read? Her concern about Precious, the baby, adoption, having the chance to better herself?

10.The birth, the baby, calling him Abdul? The girls visiting? Nurse John and his help, later at the dance, a guardian angel friend?

11.Miss Weiss, talking with her, listening, the money issues, the interview with her mother, her tough stances, home truths? Judgment?

12.The portrait of Precious’s mother, lazy, watching TV, eating, insulting her daughter? The smiles and show for the supervisor? Her disliking her granddaughter? Ousting Precious? Later and the interview with Miss Weiss, her breakdown, wanting to be loved?

13.Precious, finding somewhere to stay, Miss Rain’s help, the party, the award? Miss Rain and her partner, Precious’s reaction? The girls and their discussion, her saying ‘insects’ instead of ‘incest’?

14.Precious, her achievement, possibilities, dealing with her past? A film of encouragement? The images of Sophia Loren and her daughter in Two Women?

LOOKING FOR ERIC

UK, 2009, 120 minutes, Colour.
Steve Evets, Eric Cantona, Stephanie Bishop, Lucy -Jo Hudson.
Directed by Ken Loach.

When the group of postie-mates, middle-aged, beer-bellied, some slow, others jokey, start with a self-help exercise for their friend, Eric Bishop (Steve Everts), we realise that not everyone needs long-term Woody Allen type therapy or psychoanalysis, but that a team of friends can do a great deal to help one another.

Then, when the exercise leads to looking at oneself through the eyes of someone one loves and/or admires (and they select, Nelson Mandela, Gandhi, Fidel Castro and Sammy Davis Jr), we wonder whom we would choose. But, it is a great exercise when put into practice by Eric Bishop. He has chosen the great French soccer player for Manchester United, Eric Cantona, a wiz at scoring but temperamental. His poster is on the wall. He appears to Eric Bishop (and is billed as 'lui-meme) all the way through this serious and often very funny film, discussing life, offering advice, insights and challenges. And it works.

Funny? Therapy? A film by Ken Loach?

Well, Ken Loach is now 70 and shows that the most ardent of socially concerned film-makers can mellow with age.

Once more he directs a screenplay by his collaborator on all films since the mid-90s, Scot Paul Laverty, and it is a popular winner (even if soccer tactics are a mystery and Eric Cantona is unknown or is the sportsman-turned-actor in Elizabeth and French Film amongst others).

Loach stays again with the lives of ordinary, working-class people, his eye and his ear attuned to their daily routines, disappointments and joys, mistakes and hopes, angers and desperation. Loach is always sympathetic.

In the background are local thugs who enjoy manipulation and some psychopathic terrorising (and putting clips of it on YouTube). Loach has no time at all for them. Audiences will enjoy their uproarious comeuppance at the hands of an camera of the busloads of Manchester United fans in Cantona masks (with Cantona along for the ride). They threaten to put this footage on Blue Tube (only to be brought up-to-date on YouTube!).

But the human stories that Loach so likes to explore carry through: youthful love, panic, disappointments, personal frustration, impossibility of communication, recalcitrant step-sons, single mother and baby. The word 'forgiveness' is discussed by the two Erics but we think that it is impossible for Eric Bishop to be forgiven by his ex-wife. But, with Cantona's challenging about possibilities and speaking the truth, we find that reaching out, listening, reflection on errors, human contact are far more enabling than we might have imagined.

This is an often exhilarating entertainment, funny and simply wise (as long as you can live with the super-abundant expletives).

Winner of the Ecumenical Award, Cannes 2009.

1.A Ken Loach film? Social setting, concerns? Comic, funny, optimistic?

2.The Manchester settings, the ordinary streets and homes, the post office, the cafés? The contrast with the thug’s mansion? The British atmosphere?

3.The football inserts, the skills of Eric Cantona? His popularity? Song, fans?

4.The music of the 70s and the present? The football songs? The musical score?

5.The title, Eric Cantona, his play, skill, temperament, suspended and learning the trumpet, playing The Marseillaise, his film career?

6.The therapy theme, for ordinary people? Self-help books, courses? Meatballs and his conducting the exercises? The mates? The nature of the exercise, the jokey approach? Seeing oneself through the eyes of others: Gandhi, Nelson Mandela, Frank Sinatra, Sammy Davis Jr, Fidel Castro? Through Eric Cantona’s eyes?

7.Eric Bishop, the introduction, his desperation? His poster of Cantona? Seeing him and Cantona looking at him and giving his opinion? The dialogue, the counselling, the courage, action, decision? Doing away with fear? Possibilities leading to forgiveness and happiness?

8.Eric Cantona and his appearance, self-deprecating humour, the proverbs (invented by the screenwriter)? Except for the seagull statement? Talking, listening, commenting, advice? Smoking the pot? Going back over his career, his goals, the best moment with his pass and working with the team? The play, the raid, their Cantona masks, the real Cantona there? The interview during the final credits about the seagulls?

9.Eric Bishop, in his car, reckless driving, the crash, desperate, in hospital, wanting to go to work? At the post office, sorting the mail? Meatballs and his mates, memories of Lily, sorting the letters, each of them trying to make him laugh, telling a joke? The exercise in his home, their collaboration? Meetings at the pub, football talk? The plan to confront the thugs, participation in the attacks?

10.Eric at home, the mess, his stepsons ignoring him, the loud sounds, turning off the TV? The background of his life, his stepsons? Not talking or listening? Jesse and his being pleasant, Ryan and his friends? Zac and the confrontation, Eric watching? Finding the gun? The argument about the gun? Jesse and Eric going to the shooting, seeing the ambulance? Ryan explaining the threats to Jesse? Eric going to confront Zac, the fierce dog, filming him, putting it on YouTube? Eric not telling Lily? The sudden invasion by the police, the arrest, the terror? His final decision, encouraged by Eric Cantona, the possibilities? The masks, the spray, the camera, the threat of putting it all on YouTube?

11.Eric, his past life, the flashback with his tough father, poking him, his expectations? His panic attack? The memories of the dance, first meeting Lily, dancing, the night? The christening and his alarm? Leaving, Lily’s card and its being framed? The decades of his life, with his children, the minimum mention of his second marriage, Sam, taking her to the football?

12.Sam, the baby, needing to study, relying on both parents, the experience of the arrest and her terror? The graduation, the photos, her disbelief at her parents together?

13.Lily, the meeting, the dancing, the night, her pregnancy, the birth of Sam? Cantona urging Eric to meet her? Not facing up the first time, the second time, the phone call, going for the drink, Eric and his need for explanation, the panic, the years? Lily explaining her devastation, being single, bringing up her daughter? Becoming a new person, the bed-and-breakfast weekends? Coming for the meal, meeting the boys, the police raid?

14.The boys, the arrest? Ryan thanking his father? On the other hand, Eric cooking only for himself and their shock? Turning off their TVs? Getting his mates carry them away? Their change?

15.The raid on the thugs, the busloads of men, the masks, the massed attack, the thugs and their girlfriends, the confrontation, the red spray, the camera? Zac admitting that it was his gun?

16.The family together, signs of hope? Exploration of human nature, therapy, if only…?

MANILA

Philippines, 2009, 90 minutes, Colour.
Piolo Pascual, Jay Manalo, Alessandra de Rossi.
Directed by Adolfo Alix Jr and Raya Martin.

Raya Martin directed Independencia and co-directs Manila, keeping his preference for filming in black and white.

We are offered two stories of hardship in contemporary Manila, entering Brillante Mendoza territory without the explicit treatment.

The first story is of a young addict, his search for drugs, and the story of his mother, a respectable church-going matron (who is revealed as having a shady past) who attacks and disowns her son, leaving him in drug destitution.

The second story is longer though it takes place over less than 24 hours. Philip (Piolo Pascual, the same actor as the previous addict) is chauffeur and bodyguard to a spoilt playboy would-be politician who takes his girlfriend and an associate to a night club, is involved in a drunken brawl where Philip, to defend him, produces a gun and shoots an assailant. The rest of the story is Philip on the run, dropped by his patron, taking refuge in a refuse dump and pursued by the police.

Vivid presentation of the city of Manila in all its aspects, rich and poor. But pessimistic.

And, for those who stay for the credits, after them there is another brief tale of a young man trying to reconcile with his nurse girlfriend, allowing audiences to leave the cinema with more hope than the end of the film led them to expect.

1.Philippine slices of life: interest, observation, as stories?

2.Black and white photography, the city of Manila, the slums, the garbage heaps, the homes of the wealthy, clubs?

3.The first story: the club, the raid, the chases in the street, the police, the arrest of the woman? The contrast with William’s mother, her maid, daughter and her texting her friend, affluent way of life? William, drugs, age, wandering the streets, sleeping in the park, trying to get hits from his friends, going to the health club, the blind masseuse, her clients, his mother going into the church to pray, devout, meeting the woman from her old way of life and the revelation, the people doing the interview with the rich devout lady, her collapse, going to hospital, their camp talk? William at the hospital, his mother beating and rejecting him? Going back to the club, surrendering to the drugs?

4.The second story: Philip, waking up at his grandmother’s, his family, his work for Barry, getting ready, Barry’s story of politics, spoilt, his going to the fashion shoot, his attraction towards Amy? Barry’s house, his father, Jake and his birthday, the work as a chauffeur, the gun? Getting the new shirt to wear? The celebration, Barry smoking, the waiter backing down, Philip paying him off? Barry drinking, brawling, making Amy dance with Philip? The gun, the attack, Philip dared, shooting? Fleeing, in the street, Barry and the car, ditching him, the money? Meeting Amy, her concern? Hiding with his friend, the garbage dump, his fears, running instead of staying, the police and their raid, looking for criminals, everybody rounded up? His running, hiding in the garbage, the police chasing him, kicking him, telling the new recruit to shoot him? Lying dead in the rubbish?

5.The postscript: Denise and Gerald, Gerald pleading with Denise, her working at the hospital, her asking him to learn Tagalog, the happy ending?

6.21st century glimpses of Manila life? Value?

TAKING WOODSTOCK

US, 2009, 129 minutes, Colour.
Demetri Martin, Henry Goodman, Imelda Staunton, Liev Schreiber, Emile Hirsch, Mamie Gummer, Eugene Levy, Dan Fogler, Paul Dano, Kelli Garner, Jeffrey Paul Morgan.
Directed by Ang Lee.

Ang Lee always surprises: great Chinese films, Jane Austen adaptation, graphic novel and a survey of US society and culture from the Civil War (Ride with the Devil) to specialist films about the 1960s and 1970s (The Ice Storm, Brokeback Mountain and now, Taking Woodstock).

2009 is the 40th anniversary of the momentous cultural (and counter-cultural) event which drew half a million Americans to a concert where the stars of the time played and hippiedom reached its peak. The first television interview this reviewer ever did was in 1970, talking with director Michael Wadleigh about his cinema covering of the event, Woodstock.

What has Woodstock to say to audiences in the West today? What does Ang Lee think and James Schamus the writer of this film and several other Lee films?

For those over 60, it is a memoir, a nostalgia trip (for or against), a reminder that there were causes in those days, that the 1960s saw some of the greatest changes in the way we behaved and thought. It was the time of the Vietnam War and what that did to the consciousness of the United States. It was Richard Nixon's first year as president, the year after student riots in Paris and other European cities, of the Russian spring invasion of Prague, of the Catholic Church's encyclical letter on birth control. Midnight Cowboy won the Oscar for 1969. The times were definitely a-changing and the flower-power movement and similar stances for free love, for drug induced states, for protest, for same-sex relationships. Much is taken for granted now. And the question always rises: what are the movements now, what are the causes, and do they generate the enthusiasm and energy these days that they should?

Are young people today as liberated as they think they are? Do they take causes to heart as they might? There was hedonism then. How does it compare to the more knowing and self-indulgently affluent hedonism now?

Which are questions for the under 20s who may be made aware through this film of stances of their parents and grandparents.

This story takes in the concert, but at a distance. It is interested in the more personal story of the family that took on the project and the locals who let out the land – and all the consequences, the 500,000 who came, the attitudes and behaviours, the logistics for control and security, for food and drink, for hygiene facilities, the rain and the mud.

At the centre is a young man who is trying to help his parents run a run-down motel. The screenplay spends a lot of time on his story. He is well played by Demetri Martin and his parents by British Henry Goodman and Imelda Staunton (doing a caricature of a Jewish mother that demands attention). Also featured are Eugene Levy as the owner of the land, Emile Hirsch as a returned Vietnam veteran with problems and Liev Schreiber as a transvestite security guard.

Very American but brought to life by Ang Lee.

1.Woodstock as an event, the end of the 1960s, changes in the United States, world consciousness, manners, language, freedoms? The occasion of the music, the concert? Hippie freedom, drugs, liberation? Hedonism and causes?

2.The forty-year anniversary, the impact for older audiences, nostalgia, causes, better days or not?

3.The film for younger audiences, challenge, understanding their parents and grandparents?

4.The highlighting of the personal story, typical Americans, migrants, tight, experiencing some freedom?

5.Ang Lee and the variety of his work, his particular perspectives on American history and society?

6.Eliott as the central character, his writing the book, his memoirs and perspectives on the times, on Woodstock itself, on his family, on himself?

7.The small towns, rural, the farms, the small community, enclosed? The reactions to the concert and plans? Their being ejected from different towns? The meetings, the chamber of commerce, the issues, the small number of people, folksy, the permits? The friendliness of the diner and Eliott going there for the usual? The later hostility, the townspeople against the hippies, suspicions, thinking they would rob them? The gradual coming round to the concert? The financial profit, the concert for them – with the upset by the Earthlight Players? Acceptance?

8.The family and the motel, rundown, the English visitor and his disgust, Sophie and her tough stances and words, Father and his quiet compliance? Eliott arriving, helping out his parents, handling situations, doing the work, his income going to help his parents? His own artwork and design in New York, his discussions with his sister, his sister out of favour with his mother? Intimations of his sexual orientation?

9.The news of Woodstock, the town’s ousting the group, Eliott and his inviting the group, Michael Lang and the bonds( from Brooklyn days? The entourage and their visit, the motel, going into the swamp, not wanting to stay with the motel? Going to the Yasgur farm? Max and his doing deals, the five thousand dollars? His later changing his mind? The realisation of more money? The lawyers and their opinions? The money being available? The inspectors at the motel, the infringements and Michael Lang wanting to pay?

10.The issues of logistics, installing the phones, dividing the rooms, the amount of food, drink, toilets, the security and the Mafia turning up and the father ousting them? The police – and their change of heart? The press conference, Eliott’s nervousness, mistakenly saying the concert was free, the hundreds of thousands of people turning up?

11.The concert kept in the distance, the effect for the impact of the film? Yet songs on the soundtrack? People’s behaviour, their dress, undress, sexual behaviour, drugs, dancing, bathing, nudity, the Earthlight performance and the upset, Billy rushing onto the stage? Their living in the barn, hungry, rehearsing, performance?

12.Eliott and his work, in the bar, talking with people, the man building the stage, awareness of his orientation? His going to the concert, going past the van, the hippies, offering him acid, his psychedelic experience, the visual effects, the sea of people at the concert? His feeling liberated, change of clothes?

13.His parents, their story, Sophie and her story of walking through Siberia, allusion to the gas and the Nazis? The discovery of her hoarding the money? The rainy day? Hard and hardworking? The father, quiet, devoted, coming to life with the people, his love for Sophie, for his son, friendship with Vilma, the Brownies, their cutting loose? Eliott and his farewell to his father?

14.Billy, his family, locals, hard, permits? Billy’s experience of Vietnam, his hallucinations, revisiting the campaigns? His talking with Eliott, the performance and his running naked on stage, the effect of the concert? Saying that he was normal in Vietnam?

15.Vilma, the story, cross-dressing, service in Korea, the death of the friend, sexual orientation, work, security, with Eliott’s father, the friendship? The Brownies?

16.Michael Lang, his wealth, sponsoring the concerts, riding around on the horse? Tisha, her hard work, friendship with Eliott?

17.Woodstock event, the sun and the rain, the joy, the campaign for peace? Causes?

18.The significance of Woodstock for the United States, the first of the major concerts and gatherings, the issues of the 60s, Vietnam, freedoms, drugs, change? The prelude to the 1970s?