DOUBLE TAKE

US, 2001, 91 minutes, Colour.
Eddie Griffin, Orlando Jones, Gary Grubbs, Daniel Roebuck, Edward Herman.
Directed by George Gallo.

Double Take is a star vehicle for American comedian Eddie Griffin. He is an acquired taste – a combination of characteristics of Eddie Murphy and Richard Pryor with his own zany and over-the-top style. By contrast, Orlando Jones, actor and writer, is able to play it straight – but, with the complications of the plot, has to imitate the Eddie Griffin style.

The surprise of this film is that it is based on a story by Graham Greene, Across the Bridge, which was filmed in the early 1960s with Rod Steiger.

While the serious aspects of the plot are still there: money laundering, drug dealing, the Mexican -American border, rogue FBI agents…, there is a lot of odd couple comedy, especially on a train, with Griffin and Jones. Edward Herman is the seemingly upright manager of the company who is in league with the money launderers.

American audiences may enjoy the comedy and repartee between the two actors, but it is sometimes very much in-your-face. Direction is by George Gallo, writer and director of slight comedies like Trapped in Paradise and My Mom’s New Boyfriend.

1.A star vehicle for Eddie Griffin? His screen personality? His comic touches? Impersonations? The contrast with Orlando Jones? Their each imitating the other’s character?

2.The New York settings, affluence, offices, the streets? The train ride? The contrast with Mexico, Texas? The musical score?

3.The introduction to Daryl Chase, the beginning of his day, wealthy, his business? The deposit in the bank? His suspicions? His briefcase being stolen, Freddie and the rescue, the set-up? Daryl and his pursuit? Finding Freddie in his office? The mystery? The agents, the shootouts, the death of his assistant? His being caught? Going on the run?

4.Freddie, streetwise, the fact that he was an FBI agent, keeping an eye on Daryl? The backup support with his partner? The train ride, their each taking the other’s character? The police and agents in pursuit? The treatment of the rich man when he was dressed as a poor man, inverted snobbery? Freddie and his patter?

5.The escape from the train, Freddie being pushed off? The dog? The importance of the dog for the case?

6.Daryl’s adventures in Texas, trying to get across the border, the shootout, his thinking that Macready was authentic? The phone calls? The reality of the drug deals? Charles Alsworth and his betrayal? Alsworth and Chloe coming to Mexico?

7.Freddie, on and off the train, continually tracking down Daryl?

8.Daryl’s arrest, trying to get the money from the Mexican police? Macready turning up, Daryl and his escape?

9.The house of the wealthy man, his setting up the whole situation, his money laundering, wanting to sell all the agents to the FBI for their betrayal? The talk, the explanations? The shootouts?

10.The happy ending, Daryl and what he had learnt from the experience? Freddie as an eccentric agent? Their girlfriends? The joke about the emergency squad arriving at the end?

TELL MISIOM DING (TELL ME SOMETHING)

Korea, 1999, 117 minutes, Colour.
Directed by Yoon- Hyun Chang.

Tell Me Something is a police thriller, more like an American thriller than a Korean thriller of that period. It is a police investigation, the policeman under investigation by Internal Affairs, going it alone, encountering a mystery woman, following the clues, finding further deaths – with a twist at the end.

The film is reminiscent of some of those made in the United States during the 1990s, especially Silence of the Lambs and Seven. There is plenty of rain in the Seven vein as well as autopsies and severing of limbs in the vein of Silence of the Lambs.

The film has strong atmosphere, keeps the interest – but, in retrospect, it is more difficult to follow than one thinks at the time, some of the incidents and character behaviour is so ambiguous as not to make a great deal of sense. However, as an exercise in Korean film-making borrowing from American conventions, it is an interesting piece, well crafted.

1.A Korean murder mystery? Police investigation? The influence of American films of the 1990s? Absorbed into Korean context and style?

2.The city of Seoul, light and darkness? Homes, police precincts? Sinister aspects of the city? The special effects, the sets and décor? Suggestions of horror? The musical score?

3.The title, Detective Cho and his working with Su-Yeon?

4.The introduction to the detective, his being under inquiry? Vindicated? His becoming involved with the case? The macabre aspects of the case, the severed limbs, finding the different bodies? His becoming involved, meeting Su- Yeon? Investigating her? The story of her father and his being an artist? Her friend Seung Min? His collaboration with Detective Oh? The details of his work, being misled? Anticipating the bodies? The investigation of Su- Yeon’s relationships, the dead people? Her being suspect? His response to her, shielding her, giving her accommodation? The build-up towards the ending, her innocence, the story of her father? Seung Min and the siege in the record store? Su- Yeon and her going to France? The detective and his discovering of the house, her father’s body? Su- Yeon taking off in the plane – and Cho’s alternatives? How well delineated as a character? His work?

5.Detective Oh, older, collaboration? The investigations, working with Cho? The discovery of the house, his being killed? His message? Cho’s grief at his death?

6.Su- Yeon, her background, abused as a child? Her memories? Her friendship with Seung Min? Her relationships? Breaking them? The deaths? Her relying on Cho? Her seeming helplessness? Her art work? The build-up of suspicion? Her seemingly innocent? Her going to Paris, on the plane, the friendly man in the next seat? Her guilt?

7.Seung Min, her relationship with Su- Yeon, in the investigation? The siege at the record store – and her motivation? Her knowing the truth or not?

8.Popular ingredients for a murder mystery? Police investigation – with grim and gruesome touches?

THE LAST MAN ON EARTH

US/Italy, 1964, 86 minutes, Black and white.
Vincent Price, Franca Bettoia, Emma Danieli, Giacomo Rossi- Stuart.
Directed by Sidney Salkow/Ubaldo Ragona.

The Last Man on Earth is the first screen version of Richard Matheson’s novel, I Am Legend. Matheson has been a prolific writer of science fiction and variations on horror themes both in novel form and in screenplay. This story was then filmed in 1971 with Charlton Heston as The Omega Man, keeping to a number of aspects of the original but developing the life of the last man on Earth as well as the group pursuing him and the need for a vaccine to preserve life for young people surviving. It was also a star vehicle for Will Smith in 2007, the film also developing the work of the scientist as well as the group needing the vaccine to stay alive. However, in this film, the survivors were rather wraithlike special effects creatures rather than the actors and mutant human beings of the first two films.

Many commentators note that the survivors in this film are very much similar to those in George A. Romero’s The Night of the Living Dead – which was not made until four years later. It would seem that Romero was heavily influenced by this film, thematically and visually.

Vincent Price has to hold the film, much of his dialogue being voice-over as he lives alone after a plague has destroyed most people on the Earth and turned them into mutants. After twenty-eight minutes there is a twenty-minute flashback explaining his former life, his work as a scientist, his scepticism, the clash with his co-worker, the death of his wife and child. In the last part of the film, Price is confronted by a young woman who, if she receives antibodies, can survive. However, her group is afraid of the surviving scientist and plans to kill him.

The film was made on a very small budget, on locations in Italy (especially the EUR section of Rome). In the Italian version Ubaldo Ragona is credited as the director. However, in English versions the director is Sidney Salkow.

1.The work of Richard Matheson? Science fiction? Fantasy? Imagination? This film as the original, the impact of the two remakes?

2.The black and white photography, the Italian settings, Rome? The countryside? Homes, laboratories, the streets? The actors portraying the mutants – rather than special effects? The directness of this mode of filming? Editing, pace? Horror aspects? Musical score?

3.Vincent Price, his status as an actor in this kind of film? Strength of screen presence? His voice and articulation?

4.The situation, introducing Robert Morgan, his being alone, voice-over, starting each day, going out to destroy the mutants? Returning by dark? His discovery of the dog, some companionship? His visit to his wife’s tomb, going to sleep, having to battle through the mutants to get home? His memories, his work as a scientist, his scepticism about the virus being carried on the wind, working with Ben, the clashes? Love for his wife, his daughter? Their discussions about science, about plague? The headlines? The effect on the United States, the daughter dying? The wife, her illness, not being able to see, sudden death? His surviving, the reasons given? The years passing? The film made in 1964 – with the action going on to 1968? His encounter with the young woman, pursuit her, the transfer of blood, her being transformed into normal? Her warnings? The group coming to get him, hunting him down, the pursuit, his being pierced with a spear? His death? The future?

5.Ben, work with Robert, his experiments, antagonism towards Robert? His death, leading the mutants against him?

6.The glimpse of the wife and daughter, Robert’s devotion to them, his grief at their illness and death?

7.Ruth, her appearing, Robert pursuing her, taking her to the house, the discussions, the virus, the antibodies? Her transformation? Being able to look in the mirror, comfortable with garlic? Her trying to warn Robert?

8.The group pursuing Robert, the chase, his going into the church, standing in front of the tabernacle, his being pierced and dying?

9.The aspects of the Living Dead films? The vampire overtones with stakes, garlic, mirrors? An imaginative small-budget variation on horror themes?

YARWNG (ROOTS)

India, 2007, 96 minutes, Colour.
Directed by Joseph Pulinthanath.

Yarwng is a significant films on many counts.

It was made with a mostly non-professional cast on location in tribal areas of North East India. It is the third film only to be made in the Kokborok language of the area – and one of the reasons for making the film was an attempt to preserve this language.

It was written and directed by a Salesian priest, Fr Joseph Pulinthanath, a native of Kerala who has worked in this area of India, Tripura state, for many years. In 2002, he released his first feature film, Mathia (The Bangle) filmed in the same area and under the same conditions. Mathia was received well and was screened at a number of Asian festivals, including the International Film Festival in Goa, 2004, the Kolkota Film Festival (2004) and the Dhaka International Film Festival in Bangladesh, January 2006. Beyond Asia, it won the Best Feature Film Award at the Niepokalanov International Film and Television Festival in Poland, 2003.

However, making a film is not easy when it comes to financing. Both Mathia and Yarwng received grants from a number of Catholic funding agencies. Substantial support came from Fr Joseph's congregation, the Salesians of Don Bosco. Amongst the other organisations which contributed to both films were SIGNIS, the World Catholic Association for Communication, The Congregation for the Propagation of the Faith, Rome, and Mission, Aachen.

In going back into the tribal area for Yarwng, Fr Joseph wanted to tell a story about the upheaval that modern progress has caused for the life of the villagers. Projects like the building of a dam and the forced removal of the local people (seen in higher profile in films from China about the building of the Three Gorges Dam, Still Life and the Canadian documentary, Up the Yangtze) took place in India over the past thirty years. The locations for Yarwng are the area of such a dam and population displacement.

While so many films are worthy in their intentions, the questions for a film review must be asked 'how does this work as a film? How does it engage with its audience?'.

The answers for Yarwng are that it is an interesting and sadly entertaining film and that, by telling a story of real people, their lives, their relationships and their struggles, audiences are drawn into the issues via the story and the characters.

Yarwng opens with a tense situation in a household. A husband is complaining to his wife that he has heard gossip about her and he is upset. She patiently works and listens. She has been looking for an opportunity to talk to her husband about her past – and the film goes into flashback for her story. The next part of the film is a gentle love story even as it opens up the prospect of the dam nearing completion and the authorities trying to persuade a disbelieving people that they have to take their possessions (which are frugal) and leave for higher ground.

As with any film about a particular people, there is a great deal of local colour as we observe work in the fields, domestic situations, especially of ageing and illness, the celebration of a feast with food, song, dancing, the attempts of the local authority to make his presence felt but failing in the face of the police (and elephants brought in to crush homes) and their coercion in moving people on. Outsiders also try to swindle people out of their compensation money.

The move and the crisis in the intended groom's home concerning the health of the elderly means that the couple cannot say goodbye before they leave.

As the wife finishes her sad story for her husband, he goes to talk with the fiance and hears his story, so the audience sees the continuation of the story of the move and the waters rising.

The emotional response to these characters and their plight makes for a challenge to feelings and wondering how the difficulties could be resolved – or not.

Although the situation of local people having to migrate for a dam, for electricity and for benefits that the authorities speak about but which don't reach the people is a complex one, Yarwng is essentially a simple story about simple people and a simple way of life that serves as humane model for those whose lives get far more complicated.

This is a Catholic contribution to social awareness in a country that is principally Hindu, which has its Muslim minority and believers in local and traditional religions.

This was acknowledged by the cinema professionals of India when the film opened the Panorama section of the International Festival of India in Delhi 2008 and was awarded a jury prize. Screenings are anticipated in festivals during 2009, for instance, Brisbane. There will be a screening at the Museum of Modern Art in New York in June.

1.The impact of this indigenous film? Awards?

2.The technical skill, the small budget, the location photography, the limited camerawork, the editing, the score?

3.The people of north-east India, tribal, their way of life, work, relationships? On the move? The consequences? The title and the breaking of roots? The song and the roots being snapped yet traces remaining?

4.The impact for Indian audiences, Asian, world audiences?

5.The introduction to Sukurai and Karmati? His complaint, her work and her patience? The situation, talking about the past, her telling her husband her story?

6.The scenes of work in the field, Karmati and her suggesting running away, Wakirhai and his not understanding? Her explaining the benefits? His looking for her in the fields, in the town? Her suggestion of a thrill – but joking?

7.The notice on the tree about the dam? The village people and life and their monotony, the cycle of planting and harvesting? Karmati and her talk about love? The lyrical scenes of the couple with the flowers?

8.The house, the household, Karmati’s parents, discussions about arranging the marriage, her hopes?

9.The pregnant woman, her husband doing the exercises? Their family?

10.The festival, the people on the move, drinking on the way, Wakirhai and Karmati and the gift of the earring?

11.The authoritarian father, the rules for the village? His son? Confronting the police?

12.The interruption of the celebration, the discussion about the dam, submerging the village, the need to move to the hills? The festival and the children, the trees, the people assembling, the preparation of the food, the music, the religious overtones, the girls and their dancing?

13.Ochai and the talk about burdens, bearing them, the burden of death?

14.The village people not believing the messenger about the dam and having to move? The optimistic reasons for the dam and the benefit for the people? The assembly in the village to hear the explanation? The discussions about current and electricity, water producing light, the people mystified? The times changing?

15.The people on the move? The family of the pregnant girl, discussions about going? The police arriving and pressurising people? Issues of compensation? The water rising and the girls in the water?

16.The marriage, the preparations, dress, jewels, food? The police knocking down the buildings? The water rising?

17.The separation of Karmati from Wakirhai? The reasons? Unable to say goodbye? The plaintive lyrics of the song?

18.The compensation fraud, the people, wanting the documents? The shop owner not giving them? His sadness in moving? The elephants smashing the houses?

19.The new settlement, Sukurai and Karmati, her sadness? The helping with the building?

20.Wakirhai and Sukurai talking, Sukurai not knowing that Wakirhai was the beloved of Karmati? Weeping? Looking at the water, the things floating in the water, the trees being submerged, Wakirhai rowing away? His journey? The sense of loss?

21.Karmati coming to see him, at the house, empty? The complete loss?

22.The comments on the poor, the dispossessed – and the need for self-giving? The tragic implication of this story?

THE TEN COMMANDMENTS

US, 2007, 88 minutes, Colour.
Voices of: Ben Kingsley, Christian Slater, Alfred Molina, Elliot Gould, Kathleen Barr, Christopher Gaze.
Directed by Bill Boyce and John Stronach.

This animated version of The Ten Commandments is geared towards a children’s audience. It is a simplified presentation of the Book of Exodus. It is very literal in its presentation (as well as deriving many visual effects from Cecil B. de Mille’s The Ten Commandments). It retraces the material covered in Dreamworks’ The Prince of Egypt (1998).

The film is very much Sunday School instruction. It presents the stories of Moses and the exodus as being absolutely historical – although, the animation style might indicate to young viewers that they see it as legendary material, sagas from the history of Israel, which the book is.

The animation is straightforward, along the lines of The Miracle Maker although the human characters are less well drawn and are presented more straightforwardly. There is an interesting two-dimensional section during the credits indicating Moses’ childhood and adolescence and growing up.

While the film is narrated by Ben Kingsley in a low-key British voice, the accents of the main characters are particularly American. While this is effective for Americans to hear the Scriptures in their own intonations, it can be off-putting for those who hear the American accent as something more contemporary rather than historical. Christian Slater is Moses, Alfred Molina has the chance to rant and rave (with an American twang) as the Pharaoh. Elliot Gould is surprisingly low-key as the voice of God.

The film was written by Ed Naha, a writer of science fiction and thrillers, novelisations of such films as Robo Cop, a film researcher – not the kind of writer that one would expect for this straightforward interpretation of Exodus. The directors have worked in animation and in 2008 produced a film of Noah’s Ark: The New Beginning with an even wider range of star voices with Elliot Gould once again as the voice of God and Ben Kingsley as the narrator.

Adults will find the film far too simplistic. It would serve as a visualisation of the background of Exodus – though, probably, it pales in comparison with The Prince of Egypt.

It treats most of the episodes in the Book of Exodus although the chapter on the burning bush is particularly disappointing, not much revelation of the nature of God but rather the emphasis on the rod of Moses which can turn magically into snakes. While there is his marriage to Zipporah, he farewells them and goes back to Egypt to lead the exodus and they are not seen afterwards (though they did accompany him in the other films of the exodus).

1.The intended audience for this film? The effect on adults? Too simple and simplistic? For children? The effectiveness of information, instruction, visualisation, biblical themes? The danger of the presentation of an angry and vengeful God, especially with the plagues and the last plague?

2.The nature of the animation, the human characters, lacking subtlety? The action – and the references to the de Mille film, especially in the parting of the Red Sea, the forming of the letters of the Ten Commandments on the tablets of stone?

3.A reading of the Book of Exodus, a literal reading? The challenge to the credibility of these events as actual? Seeing them as saga, enhancement of episodes? Religious interpretation?

4.The focus on Egypt, the Israelites as slaves, hard work? The Pharaoh and his advisers, his vengeful attitude towards the Israelites? Oppressing them? The edict for the death of the male children?

5.Moses’ father and mother, their concern, the soldiers’ search? Their putting Moses in the basket, Miriam following, the princess finding him, keeping him, Miriam getting her mother as nurse?

6.The animation during the credits and Moses growing up? The effect of the two-dimensional animation?

7.The son of the Pharaoh? His sharing the upbringing with Moses, the wrestling scene? The rivalry? The story of Moses, the killing of the Egyptian overseer, his having to flee? Moses in the desert, his search, helping the women from oppression at the well? Being welcomed in Jethro’s household, his marriage, children, the celebration?

8.The experience of the burning bush, the voice of God? The revelation? The information of how to use the rod in confrontation with Pharaoh? The return to Egypt, the farewell to his wife and children?

9.Meeting Aaron again, with Miriam? The background to his upbringing? Moses and Aaron going to Pharaoh, Pharaoh with his son? His contempt of Moses, contempt of the message, declaring himself god?

10.The visualising of the plagues, dramatic, overwhelming the Egyptians? Pharaoh and the hardening of his heart? The advisers wanting to capitulate? The snakes, the ice, the lice, the flies, the blood river? Building up to the death of the firstborn? The Israelites and their meal, painting the lintels with blood?

11.Pharaoh letting the people go, grief over his son? The Israelites moving out, the pursuit by the Egyptians as Pharaoh changed his mind? At the sea, the rebellion? Moses and his prayer, listening to God? Aaron’s help, Miriam’s support? The colloquial dialogue interspersed with the biblical dialogue, the American-style slang?

12.The parting of the Red Sea, the Israelites passing through, the Egyptians’ pursuit? The children looking at the fish in the sea? The overwhelming of the Egyptians, the corpses and the fish?

13.Dathan( and his rebellion, the criticism? Confronting Moses and Aaron? The water and its gushing, the manna, the quails? The Israelites saying they should go back? Moses and his exasperation?

14.Moses on Mount Sinai, the forty days and forty nights, the giving of the Ten Commandments, the reciting of them? Moses coming down, discovering the golden calf? Breaking the tablets?

15.Aaron, the rebellion of the people, collecting the gold and jewels, making the calf, worshipping it?

16.Joshua singled out as the successor? Moses supporting him? Reaching the Promised Land, Moses and his age? Looking across the river? The commission to Joshua? The people going into the land? Moses, his going to the mountain, his death?

17.How effective or ineffectual is this kind of biblical film for biblical instruction? For inspiration?

HOLDING ON

UK, 1999, 91 minutes, Colour.
Kenneth Colley, Douglas Fielding, Jan Goodman, Joshua Henderson.
Directed by Afonso Reis A. Sousa.

Holding On was produced at a time when the British film industry was interested in gangster films, something they continued for several years into the new century. Gangster Number One made quite an impact and many aspiring film-makers, like the group responsible for this one who also directed some episodes of The Bill, tried to make films in the same vein.

They were small-budget and lacked a strong cast. Veteran Kenneth Colley appears as a former detective who was acquitted of misconduct, sells security over the phone, is invited to help with an investigation and wants to clear the name of the wife of the friend who was murdered. It seems that he was the wrong target. However, there are various complications, gang warfare in London, murders from both sides, corrupt police. There is a twist at the end – and a rather gloomy ending.

The film is familiar material from many television episodes of police investigation series.

1.The popularity of British gangster films at the time? How well do they stand up?

2.The London settings, the streets, north and south of the river? The homes, brothel, police precincts? An authentic feel?

3.The title, the reference to Phil? His life? The other police and their work? To the gangsters?

4.The opening, the young man waking, the money, the bike, the gun, the killing at the doorstep? The other car, Rigg and his chauffeur, the message, his not going to the brothel? The complication of who was the target for the killing? The phone call to the killer, reference to the newspapers, to the wrong person being killed?

5.The police, Stokes and his dislike of Phil, his being in charge? His testing out Phil to get more information, the visits, the confrontations? John as a friend, inviting Phil to the investigation? His taking orders? His shrewdness? The other police, Fowler, his following Phil? His being on Rigg’s payroll? His shooting Tony? The discussion with Rigg, his drug-taking, Phil realising the truth, confronting him? Fowler’s death?

6.Sue, the death of her husband, not telling her daughter? Phil and his phoning her, the meeting, going to the morgue, the meal, the relationship? The devotion to her daughter? Phil seeing the daughter’s drawings, realising the abuse situation? Suspicion of Sue? Going in the car, the talk, her shooting him? Her taking her daughter, free or would she be captured?

7.Rigg and his gang, Glaswegian, a young thug, moving drugs? His brutality, torturing people? His bashing the lover of the rival gang leader?

8.Burrows, his domain in London, his retirement, his past contact with Phil, fifteen years of Phil pursuing him? The lover being killed? Phil’s visit, his indication of Fowler being corrupt?

9.The brothel, the madam, the prostitutes, the information given? Phil and his visit, the massage, getting the information? Rigg going to the brothel? The barrister going?

10.The investigation, wheels within wheels? The solution? The pessimistic ending?

PINOCHET IN SUBURBIA

UK, 2006, 90 minutes, Colour.
Derek Jacobi, Phyllida Law, Peter Capaldi, Yolanda Vazquez, Anna Massey, Pip Torrens, Michael Maloney, Susan Wooldridge.
Directed by Richard Curson Smith.

Pinochet in Suburbia was written by its director Richard Curson Smith. It is a glimpse of a year in General Pinochet’s life which he spend in London, under house arrest, fighting extradition papers.

The film focuses on this narrow period but, verbally, goes back to Pinochet’s coup against Salvador Allende in 1973, the oppression, the torture and persecution, the disappeared during his seventeen years in office. During the 1990s he was a senator.

The film also shows Chilean campaigners in London protesting against Pinochet and demanding justice. Amnesty International is involved through the character of Andy Mc Entee, played by Peter Capaldi.

Derek Jacobi gives a very interesting performance as Pinochet with Phyllida Law as his wife. Anna Massey does an interesting impersonation of Baroness Thatcher. Michael Maloney does not look exactly like Jack Straw but portrays the foreign secretary of the period. The supporting cast includes Pip Torrens as Pinochet’s law, Yolanda Vazquez as the chief Chilean protester and Jessica Stevenson as the police officer who has to guard Pinochet.

The film shows the old man, his imperious and arrogant manner, his experiencing imprisonment and railing against it. The film also shows the politicking by his opponents, the role of the Chilean government, the Spanish government and its plans for its extradition for crimes against Spanish citizens, the British Foreign Office and its diplomacy in dealing with Pinochet, his arrest and his ultimate leaving for Chile.

1.Audience attitudes to General Pinochet, the background of his coup in Chile, his role in the 70s and 80s, the dictatorship, the anti-communism, the number of people arrested, tortured and murdered? International response to him? Those in favour, especially Baroness Thatcher? The others who are quoted as asking for mercy for him including Cardinal Ratzinger?

2.The glimpse of Pinochet in his old age, the background of his career, his personality, relationships, especially with his wife? The numbering of the days on screen of his house arrest?

3.The London settings, the Surrey mansion? The house and the grounds, the court? Protests? The musical score?

4.The insertion of actual footage, of news broadcasts, of current affairs programs with Jeremy Paxman, of footage of the House of Lords and the decisions of the lords?

5.Derek Jacobi and his impersonation of Pinochet? Age, the senator, his own self-image, his relationship with his wife, the welcome by Margaret Thatcher? In the hotel? Going to hospital, his arrest? His reaction and arrogance? The house arrest, the police, his harsh attitudes towards the policewoman? Later relenting and walking and talking with her? Discussing her marriage? His lawyer, the discussions, his presumption about being freed? His visitors? At home, watching television, petulance at the meals, his wife?

6.The explanations of Allende’s overthrow? American support? The arrested, the tortured and the disappeared? The role of communism in Chile in the 70s and 80s? The people who left Chile? Those who remained?

7.Amnesty International, Andy Mc Entee and his role, character, contact with Nicole, the phone calls, the plans? The information from the hotel maid? The hospital, going to the police, the various discussions about immunity, the political background, Spain and extradition? Offences against nationals in another country and legislation after 1988?

8.Jack Straw, his political background, the discussions, his advisers? His past visit to Chile, anti-Pinochet? Happy that he was arrested? The scenes with his son and his son’s reaction?

9.The House of Lords, the speeches by the lords, their decisions, the television footage?

10.Nicole, her work, with Andy Mc Entee, with the protesters, the communist not wanting crosses to be placed on the earth as a memento? The perspectives on Chile, on Pinochet? Abrasive, wanting revenge? The PR session and the impassioned speech by Nicole?

11.The lawyer, his advice, work, visits, finally angry with Pinochet?

12.Margaret Thatcher and her visits, her gifts, her attitudes, the help in the Falklands, anti-communism, seeing Pinochet as an ally? Her expressions of disgust with the government?

13.The review, the House of Lords, the historic overturning of the decision? The courts and judges? Issues of diplomacy? The role of the Chilean government? Their advice?

14.The effect of imprisonment on Pinochet, not allowed into the garden, finally walking? His reactions? His chaplain, receiving communion?

15.The psychological test, his answers, testing whether he could return to Chile? Margaret Thatcher coming to farewell him?

16.The end, the government move, his returning to Chile? In fact his being too ill to go to court?

17.An interesting glimpse at British and Chilean history? Dictator, justice?

PATHS OF GLORY

US, 1957, 86 minutes, Black and white.
Kirk Douglas, Ralph Meeker, Adolphe Menjou, George Macready, Wayne Morris, Richard Anderson, Joseph Terkel, Christiane Kubrick, Emil Mayer, Timothy Carey.
Directed by Stanley Kubrick.

Considered Stanley Kubrick’s first major film. He had made some short films after his experience as a photographer and moved into thrillers Killer’s Kiss and The Killing which has been compared favourably to John Huston's The Asphalt Jungle of 1950. Employed by Kirk Douglas and filming in Germany, Kubrick wrote and directed this film about a case in World War I of cowardice and military hypocrisy. The film was well made, very well acted and directed. It was so strong that for a long time it was banned in France - the subject of the film.

Kirk Douglas is excellent but there is good support from Ralph Meeker as the soldier on trial and Adolph Menjou and George Macready as arrogant generals. This is strong social drama made not so long after World War II taking a critical look back at World War I and militarism. Good comparisons would be Joseph Losey’s King and Country and Dalton Trumbo’s Johnny Got His Gun.

Kubrick then worked with Marlon Brando on the screenplay of One Eyed Jacks but then moved on with Kirk Douglas to the direction of Spartacus. Kubrick disowned Spartacus because of Douglas's producing interference. However it is a very good costume classic. Kubrick then went on to his great successes from Lolita through 2001 to A Clockwork Orange and Barry Lyndon.

1.Audience presuppositions about war? The futility of war? The role of officers, ordinary serving men? Casualties? Decisions and mistakes?

2.The film’s classic status? The critique of war? Kirk Douglas as producer, actor? Stanley Kubrick as director?

3.The black and white photography, German locations, the palaces and the interiors and their wealth? The contrast with the trenches, the battlefields, the Anthill? The court-martial area?

4.The title and its ironies?

5.The battle sequences, the realism? The night mission?

6.Mireau and Broulard, elderly, generals? France 1916? French traditions of military honour, the officers above the law, the soldiers despised? The language, respectful, yet manipulative? The ironies and the lies? The characters?

7.The mission, Broulard and his insistence, Mireau and his objections, the bribe for promotion? Circling round the issue, the final agreement? The discussion about casualties and the casual attitude? The deadline for taking the Anthill?

8.Colonel Dax, Kirk Douglas’s presence, his law background, integrity, skill in command, obeying orders, difficulties?

9.The picture of the ordinary men, Mireau and his tour through the trench, the shell-shocked man and his denial of shell-shock? Condemning men as cowards? The morale-boosting walk? His talk, the clichés and questions to the men? Saint -Auban as his assistant?

10.The issue of the night mission, the danger, Roget and his drinking? His fears? Going out, crawling, the flares, the death of the soldier? Paris’s reaction? The background of their rivalry? Paris and his despising Roget? Roget writing his report, his threats to Paris? Dax and his demanding the report?

11.The taking of the Anthill, the preparation, the strategies, the men going over the top, instant deaths, the battlefield? The men discussing which was easier, to die by the bayonet or by gunshot? Mireau and his ordering the guns to be fired on his own men? The officers and their demanding the orders be in writing?

12.The failure to take the Anthill, the number of casualties? The group unable to emerge from the trench? Dax and Mireau and their discussion of the casualties, the percentages of loss?

13.Mireau and his anger, accusing the men of cowardice, reporting to Broulard, his criticism of Dax? Wanting the court-martial? Wanting the men to be executed? Whittling down the number to three?

14.The choice of the three men: Paris chosen by Roget? Arnaud as a war hero but yet chosen? Ferol as considered socially undesirable? The men in themselves, their reactions, fears, talking? Dax and his promise to defend them?

15.The chaplain, his ministrations, the pious clichés that he spoke to the men, yet his support of them? At their deaths?

16.The court-martial, the judge, Saint -Auban as the prosecutor, Dax and the rules imposed on him, no record? His interrogation of each of the men, proving their lack of cowardice? The court’s decision?

17.The dinner, Broulard, his guests? Dax with the information about Mireau firing on his men? Broulard and his assent? Going back to the dinner? Later his interpretation that Dax was after Mireau’s job? His mistake? His meal with Mireau, Dax and his arrival, the inquiry and Mireau’s disgust? Dax accusing Broulard of being a sadistic old man?

18.The execution, Roget commanded by Dax to be in charge? The visuals of the three men, the chaplain, the squad, the shootings, their deaths?

19.Dax outside the tavern, the German singer, the men taunting her, uniting in singing with her? Image of the futility of war and the possibility of men united?

20.The lasting impact of this critique of war?

ED WOOD

US, 1994, 127 minutes, Black and white.
Johnny Depp, Martin Landau, Sarah Jessica Parker, Patricia Arquette, Jeffrey Jones, G.D. Spradlin, Vincent D'Onofrio, Bill Murray, Mike Starr, Lisa Marie, George ‘The Animal’ Steele, Juliet Landau, Rance Howard.
Directed by Tim Burton.

Edward D. Wood Jr was once voted the worst director of all time. This is rather unfair as there are many other contenders and possible winners. However, he became famous with the reissue of his Plan 9 From Outer Space and the cult following for his first film, Glen or Glenda. However, if he has some claim to better fame, it is in his Bride of the Monster – which can stand up against several other B-features of the period.

As played by Johnny Depp, he is the eternal optimist. He writes, produces, directs, all with unbounded enthusiasm and faith in his own abilities which were, to be generous, exceedingly limited. He also has the capacity for supporting rather needy people. In the film, this is very important for his relationship with Bela Lugosi (Martin Landau in an Oscar-winning performance, as well as winning many other awards).

The film is very interesting in its picture of Bela Lugosi in his down-and-out days, a drug addict and alcoholic, abandoned by his wives. By chance he meets Ed Wood, finds him a friend, agrees to act in his films – and Landau’s rendition of the famous home speech from Bride of the Monster is a masterpiece of interpretation as well as impersonation. Martin Landau creates a three-dimensional character, a strange being, however, he does with great empathy.

The film has a very strong supporting cast with Sarah Jessica Parker very good as Dolores Fuller, Ed Wood’s first girlfriend, and Patricia Arquette coming in at the end as the woman who became his wife. Jeffrey Jones, who appeared in several of Tim Burtons films, is Criswell, the TV seer. Bill Murray primps and preens as Bunny Breckinridge whose ambition is to have a sex change. Lisa Marie is Vampyra, the television personality who introduced horror films and eventually appeared in Plan 9 From Outer Space. A feature of Wood’s films was the Big Tour Johnson, here played by George Steele.

There is a cameo by Vincent D'Onofrio as Orson Welles discussing films (with some wry comments on casting Charlton Heston in A Touch of Evil) and encouraging Wood who sees the parallel between the two of them.

The film spends a great deal of time recreating the making of Glen or Glenda, The Bride of the Monster (initially called The Bride of the Atom) and Plan 9 From Outer Space, which gives a very solid impression of Wood and his film-making.

The film also recreates the atmosphere of Hollywood in the 1950s, the group on the fringe making B-budget movies (or less) and the money-making hopes of producers.

Tim Burton was to make a number of very striking films including Beetlejuice, Batman, Batman Returns, Big Fish. His films with Johnny Depp were very striking indeed beginning with Edward Scissorhands, then Ed Wood, followed by Sleepy Hollow, Charlie and the Chocolate Factory, The Corpse Bride and Sweeney Todd.

This is a very impressive film in all ways and an impressive look at Hollywood – and a strange tribute to an almost talentless film-maker.

1.Audience knowledge of Ed Wood? Of Glen or Glenda, of Bride of the Monster, of Plan 9 From Outer Space? Audience knowledge of Bela Lugosi and Dracula? The reputation of Ed Wood?

2.The film as a tribute, as a critique, as a film of amazement about a man with no talent? His optimism and his achievement?

3.The black and white photography, the 1950s, the world of Hollywood and its atmosphere? Wood’s world? Bela Lugosi’s world? Hollywood? The world of addiction? The world of the studios? Musical score?

4.The making and re-creation of scenes from Glen or Glenda, Bride of the Atom, Plan 9 From Outer Space? The talent of the film in dramatising talentlessness? The effect, the image of Ed Wood, of Lugosi? The dramatic significance of Lugosi’s speech about home – Martin Landau’s delivery and the repetition of the speech? Offering some depth?

5.Johnny Depp as Ed Wood, the background of his war experience, his vision for film-making, being limited and mundane in imagination, his ability to be delighted, excited? Eternal optimism? His relationship with Dolores, their life, his hopes, writing the scripts, her assisting him, his relationship to Bela Lugosi and helping him at the end of his life, with Bunny Breckinridge, with Tor, with Criswell and the coterie? Going to producers, his spiel, trying to raise money? Satisfied with the performances, cutting after one take, his admiration for what he had done?

6.Ed Wood and his pride, his angora fetish, Dolores and her missing clothes, his explanation about his mother, wanting a daughter, dressing up in women’s clothes, not homosexual orientation? The war, what he was wearing in a raid? Dolores’ reaction, her finally accepting the truth? His telling the producer about his life? Directing wearing the clothes? Later wearing them to calm himself down from stress? The Baptists and their reaction? Writing Glen or Glenda, acting in the film, the background of Christine Jorgensen’s sex change, his pitch, performing the role himself? As a means of talking about himself?

7.The scripts, the pitches, the producers, George and his giving him some backing? Mr Feldman, taking the film – and later laughing when screening it? His films and the lowest common denominator? At work, the arguments? His production team, the old men, the two young men and their ingenuous behaviour (and talking Boris Karloff to Lugosi)?

8.Ed passing the shop, the coffin, the encounter with Bela Lugosi, admiration, talk, giving him a lift, phoning him, the meetings, going to his house? Offering him roles?

9.Bela Lugosi and the impact of Dracula, living on that reputation? His career? His drugs, alcohol, wives leaving him? His friendship with Eddie and reliance on him? Discussions, his performances, with the group, the premieres, the autographs? His failure and humiliation on the comedy show on television? The fundraising and his being the name to draw the funds? The failures of these events? His home speech? The nights, ringing Ed, the drugs, on set, weary, getting his fix? His decision to go to rehabilitation, the agony of his drying out? Happy in the final days of his life? His funeral?

10.Criswell, the introduction to the film, his performance on TV, his prophesies about 1970, his praising Ed, going out to dinner, becoming part of the group?

11.Bunny, mournful, wanting the sex change, the visit to Mexico, coming back with the band, his performance in the film?

12.Dolores, strong woman, helping Ed, loving him, the shock about the cross-dressing, her performance, wanting the central role in The Bride of the Monster, Ed and his meeting the actress, Dolores’ small role, her finally leaving?

13.The actress in the bar, Ed talking with her, assuming she had money, her demand for the central role, the performance, the rivalry with Dolores, the irony that she had no money?

14.Tor, Dolores, Bunny and Ed going to the wrestling, Ed imagining Tor in films, the proposal, Tor as a person, the acting, part of the group?

15.Ed waiting at the hospital, the encounter with Kathy, nice, her father, their chatting, going to together, her helping him, the relationship, marriage? The premiere in the rain?

16.The cameo of Orson Welles, Ed’s admiration for him, comparisons with him, Welles and his comments about Charlton Heston, about his films, encouraging Ed?

17.Going to the Baptists, the discussions, the whole group being baptised, Bunny and his awkwardness? The Baptists on set, wanting changes, thinking there was blasphemy, coming up with the title of Plan 9 From Outer Space? Ed’s exasperation and walking out, coming back wearing the clothes?

18.Vampyra, her shows on television, ignoring Ed after his plea at the fundraiser, her being sacked, meeting with Ed, her performing in the film?

19.Doctor Mason, Ed and his vision, having him to substitute for Bela Lugosi? Mr McCoy?, the fundraising pitch, McCoy? wanting his son in the film and changing the ending? Wanting explosions?

20.Ed as a person, with the producers, with people, on set, with his crew, improvising, the streets, stealing the rubber monster for his film, watching the footage and incorporating it, his cutting after one take, zest in writing scripts, feeling that they were improved, his premieres, the booze and mayhem, the premiere in the rain, success?

21.Insights into Hollywood, moviemaking, movie marketing – and the audiences who liked Ed Wood’s films?

text




MASTERMINDS

US, 1997, 106 minutes, Colour.
Patrick Stewart, Vincent Kartheiser, Brenda Fricker, Bradley Whitford, Matt Craven, Jon Abrahams, Callum Keith Rennie.
Directed by Roger Christian.

Masterminds is an enjoyable thriller for a younger audience. At one stage there is a reference to Die Hard. This has been called a Die Hard for children. There is a fair amount of violence – but of the rather bloodless kind, explosions, minefields …

Patrick Stewart is obviously enjoying himself as a very suave security expert who masterminds the taking over of an affluent school and holding some of the children to ransom. His dialogue is full of sardonic remarks. Stewart, a veteran of screen and stage, made a great impact in his Star Trek years on television and in feature films. Since then he has had a distinguished career on stage. Vincent Kartheiser is the young recalcitrant lad, expert in electronics, who becomes the young Bruce Willis to save everybody in the school (Kartheiser being a veteran of television series). Brenda Fricker is as usual severe as the principal. A younger Bradley Whitford appears as a millionaire whose daughter has been kidnapped.

The film’s action is well done, the holding of the children as hostage is quite effective and there are quite an amount of special effects as the young boy attempts to thwart the plans of the kidnapping gang.

The film was directed by Roger Christian who was in the team who won a set decoration Oscar for Star Wars. Amongst his feature films were the science fiction Lorca and the Outlaws as well as the rather odd Nostradamus. After this film he made the Scientology film, Battlefield Earth, starring John Travolta and based on a novel by L. Ron Hubbard.

1.An entertaining adventure story? For younger audiences? Parents?

2.The American school setting, the mansion-like school, its vastness, the ordinary classrooms and corridors, the offices, the basement and its intricacies, the air vents etc? The tunnels for the sewers leading into the city? Special effects? Stunt work? All effective for this kind of film? The rousing score?

3.The title, the reference to Rafe Bentley and his gang? To Ozzie?

4.The introduction to Ozzie, downloading pirated editions of Scream 2? His contact with his friend Richard, ‘K-Dog’? His relationship to his father, his father’s remarrying, his attitude towards Helen? The clashes with his stepsister Melissa? Her putting on tantrums and taunting him? His father confronting him, threatening him with military school? His being shrewd and anticipating all his father’s comments? His having to take his sister to school?

5.The school, Claire Maloney and her strict running of the school, her antagonism towards Ozzie, his burning laboratories etc, his being expelled? Her confrontations with him and ousting him? The encounter with Rafe Bentley?

6.His sister, with her friends, going into class? Their being called into the assembly hall, the speech by Bentley, the decisions by Claire Maloney? Her wanting to go with her friend on the special art class? The teachers, the taking of the children to be ransomed into a special room? The classes being dismissed, some of the children being let go, later a bigger group let go? The children and their thinking it was an exercise?

7.Rafe Bentley, Patrick Stewart’s style, the discussions with Claire Maloney, supervising the security? The takeover, in the computer room, the map, controlling everything, the gates? The arrival of the police, the timing? Bentley and his background in security, his expertise? His team? The rounding up of the children, his speech, avuncular? The beginning of the drilling downstairs? The guarding of the perimeter? The police arriving, the minefield? The truck ramming the gate?

8.Ozzie, seeing what was happening, getting back into the building? His shrewdness in estimating what was going on? His getting to the computer, opening the gates again? The threat to the plan? His continually going through the school, on the roof and almost falling, down the chimney, the confrontation with the security guards? His putting up the heat and its effect on the group? His turning on the sprinklers? The computers being wet? The umbrellas? His being in the vents, the smoke, the knife’s piercing the floor? His getting out through the fan exit? His making connections for the phone, with his parents? Listening in to the plans? His setting the explosives for the swimming pool? Trying to rescue Melissa, her being taken by Bentley? K-Dog? getting in? Their teaming up? The explosion, the water from the pool? The vehicle and their pursuit through the tunnels? His rescuing Melissa and getting her from the other vehicle? Turning up in the middle of the city through the manhole? Concern about the police, the long talk with Helen, with his father, being a family, reconciliation? The hero of the film?

9.Bentley, keeping calm, his strict timing, the heat, the sprinklers, the drilling? His insistence that they keep to the timetable? The plan for the helicopter, for the money, the delivery of the money, being delivered by Foster? The irony of his being his accomplice for the money? The escape, Claire Maloney and her interventions, his driving – and landing in the harbour with the sewage?

10.The various associates, the computer expert, the drilling? The tough security guards? Being outwitted by Ozzie?

11.Claire Maloney, a strict school, with Bentley, watching him take over? Being helpless? Her going into action? Ozzie and the leading of the children to safety? On the vehicle with Bentley? Wielding the baseball bat?

12.The parents, their concern, Miles Lawrence and money being no object? The Paxtons, their concern, Ozzie and Melissa?

13.The financial deal, the buying of the television network, Foster DeRoy? and his presence? The deals? The irony of his being criminal? The background with Bentley and their past interactions?

14.The film’s being able to use all the excitement of Die Hard but adapted for a younger audience?