MAN OF THE YEAR

US, 2006, 115 minutes, Colour.
Robin Williams, Christopher Walken, Laura Linney, Jeff Goldblum.
Directed by Barry Levinson.

Man of the Year is an interesting comedy with serious undertones about American politics.

It was written and directed by Barry Levinson who began his career as a screenwriter (Best Friends, Young Sherlock Holmes in the 1980s) and moved into direction with Diner and Tin Men. He won an Oscar for best director and best film for Rain Man in 1988.

Levinson has had a varied career. One his standout films was Sleeper. In the 21st century he has had less success – though his comedy about Hollywood, What Just Happened? was the final film at the 2008 Cannes film festival.

Levinson had been interested in politics, especially with his war and government satire and its exploitation of the media in David Mamet’s Wag the Dog.

This film is a star vehicle for Robin Williams. He is able to do his manic shtick as a TV host and interviewer. He is extremely popular – though this kind of humour does not sit well with many audiences outside the United States. Christopher Walken plays his producer and manager. With crowds complimenting him on his programs, they suggest that he stand for President of the United States. He decides to do this, beginning his campaign rather more seriously and, then, in a televised debate, taking it over and winning over the audiences.

The other aspect of the film, the more serious aspect, is reminiscent of the fiasco in the 2000 election in Florida. This time it is a computer company which provides the machines for tallying the votes – but has inbuilt mechanisms for swinging the votes to the desired effect. Laura Linney plays an employee who discovers the defects – and Jeff Goldblum, as the manager, takes means to suppress her views. However, she contacts the president-elect and complications ensue in terms of honesty, the public, the presidency, personal ambitions.

The film is humorous at times – but, in the context of the second Bush administration and the anticipation of the 2008 election, it is interesting and relevant.

1.The political satire from the George W. Bush era? Seen in retrospect of his presidency?

2.A Robin Williams comedy? His screen persona, patter, television interviewer, his campaign, as a comedian?

3.Satire and politics, the campaigns, the debates, the ideologies?

4.The drama, the counting of votes, power, companies, Eleanor and her being fired, the plots, public relations?

5.The technology, the computer companies, the counting of votes, the glitches, the rigging of the machines, the expose? The memories of the count in Florida, 2000?

6.Robin Williams as Tom, seeing him on air, his playing for laughs, audience response, the fans, Eleanor watching? People commenting on his potential for presidency? His decision, running, becoming more serious, his change of style, the advice from the campaign team, funding, the staff? Jack and his friendship, advice? The concern about being too serious, going to the television? The reactions, the tours?

7.Tom and his change of heart, the advice for the debate, the Republican, the president? His reaction, the moderator and her loss of control? Tom taking over, clever, the range of points being made, the audience reaction, the public reaction?

8.Eleanor and her work, the testing of the computers, the information, sending the email to the bosses, the bosses and their watching her? The build-up to the election, Eleanor and her reaction to the result? The company trying to discredit her, intruding into her house, pumping the drugs into her, her erratic behaviour at the cafeteria, being taken to the institution? Daniel and his support, spying? The election reaction?

9.Her decision to go to Tom? Posing as the FBI agent – and their later using this against her? Talking to him, attracted to him? The reaction of the team? The dance? Going out, the false information about her? Tom checking her out, listening to advice, using his own intuition? The attempts at phone calls? Her desperation, the phone booth, the accident, Tom believing her?

10.Tom and Eleanor, friendship, Tom going to Congress wearing the 18th century clothes and wig? The press conference? The public and his concern?

11.Eleanor in the hospital, Tom believing her?

12.Tom going to Jack, to the others? The visit to the Oval Office and the talk with the president? The truth, being able to let go the presidency?

13.The portrait of the team, their personalities, advice, working together, coming from the television background?

14.Jack, the narration, his character, advice, his heart turn, in hospital, watching the election result and drowsing in his hospital bed?

15.The end, Eleanor becoming the television producer, Tom’s programs, success?

16.The impact for an American audience? The political landscape of the 21st century? The experience of elections, the range of presidents, President Bush, the difficulties with voting? Non-American? audiences enjoying this picture?

GOOD

UK/Germany, 2008, 96 minutes, Colour.
Viggo Mortensen, Jason Isaacs, Jodie Whitaker, Mark Strong, Gemma Jones.
Directed by Victor Amorim.

This is a film one would like to praise more than one can. It is worth seeing because of its themes: the ordinary, 'good' German who is anti-Nazi in principle, who has a literary and cultured background but who, thinking that Hitler cannot last, is more compliant than he realises, gradually succumbing to invitations to join the party, susceptible to flattery and finishing as a 'consultor' SS official, though he prefers to be called professor. Seemingly small concessions and decisions that have momentous consequences does make the final sequence of the film even more devastating.

However, there is something not quite affecting in the treatment of the theme. Perhaps it is the theatrical origins in C.P.Taylor's play. Perhaps there is a staginess or some artificiality about the attempts at a realistic, even naturalistic setting. The same is true of many of the performances. The touch of magic realism where the professor hears music and sees groups singing when he faces some crisis is actually well done and acceptable.

The settings and the re-creation of Nazi Germany (in Hungary) are effective. The increasing persecution of the Jews pervades the latter part of the film, culminating in riots, arrests and trucks taking Jews away to the camps. This contrasts with the glimpse of a film being made of the professor's book, and his being congratulated by Goebbels, elegant Nazi parties, home dinners and the generally calm, even civilised manner of the Nazi characters despite their actions (with a principally British cast).

At the centre is Viggo Mortensen's quite different performances from, say, Eastern Promises or The Lord of the Rings. He is reticent, awkward, bookish, despite his serving in World War I. His marriage is strained. He cares for his mentally disturbed mother. He succumbs to the very Aryan student who makes a play for him. He supports, then abandons, then tries to help his Jewish friend, a psychiatrist played by Jason Isaacs. Mark Strong is always good and is a Chancery adviser. Gemma Jones is the mother.

The film is worthy. Sometimes we might feel we are observing from outside and then are drawn into the film emotionally even while there are more abstract discussions about life, euthanasia, mental disability as well as the destruction of human rights and dignity. However, the climax in the concentration camp with the prisoner band playing, the haggard workers walking by and the children and women moving towards the furnaces is striking and shocking.

1.Nazi and Holocaust issues? In the 20th century? The memory of the 21st century? Salutary warnings?

2.The title, human nature and people being good, good people and morality, norms of morality, their affecting or not affecting people on the margins of politics, issues of society? Making concessions for their own good, the consequences? Drawing them into involvement? Issues of conscience? Friendships, betrayal, complicity?

3.The re-creation of the period, 1930s Germany, Berlin, the university, homes, the chancery? The sets for the film studios? Authentic? The musical score?

4.The climax in the concentration camp, the picture of the prisoners, emaciated, the men in lines, the buildings, the women and children going towards the ovens? The smoke? The orchestra of prisoners playing? John standing in the middle of it? The audience immersed in it – and the film ending?

5.The structure, a play, the three acts? The times, the dialogue, dramatic? The play opened out?

6.1937, John as professor, ordered to the chancery, the interview, his book, the issue of mercy killing? His being requested to write the paper, Hitler taking an interest in his writings, his consent?

7.1933, John’s memories, the lectures, on Proust, the semi-interested students, the burning of the books? The students watching? The professor and his asking John not to teach Proust? Political difficulties? The influence of John’s father-in-law? Joining the Nazi party or not? Hitler just becoming chancellor? Anna at the lectures? Her wanting to discuss her thesis? John’s relationship with Helen, tense, her playing the piano? Cooking, the meals, the children? His mother, coming out of the institution, her being demanding?

8.Anna, her approach, seductive? Symbolic of John’s flirtation with the Nazis, then his commitment? Their meetings, talk, the lies? Her coming to his house, wet, staying the night, John’s explanations to Helen? His infidelity, feeling spontaneous, the change, confiding in Maurice?

9.Maurice, the psychiatrist, his friend, their having served in World War One, the trenches? Maurice and his prurience? Asking questions? The Jewish background?

10.Anna, her studies, her ideas, setting herself on John, the visits, talking, staying overnight, the separation from his wife, John marrying her?

11.John, the background of the war, with Maurice? Stiff and academic, the effect of marriage and children? The separation? His visits, the children’s pride in him, Helen at peace? His father-in-law at the social and his disdain?

12.John, the invitation to be associated with the SS, the promotion, the uniform, the title, his preferring Professor?

13.The Nazi official, the interrogation, meeting John and becoming friends? Their discussions, Nazi pride, socialising and parties, the ideology, John and his trying to buy the ticket to Paris for Maurice, the official finding him, bringing him to the top of the line, privilege? The meal with the husbands and wives, the news about the assassination attempt in Paris, being called in, the riots and the smashing of the Jewish quarters, the arrests?

14.Maurice and the persecution of the Jews, losing his rights? Losing his job? His apartment being sealed and signed? His coming to John, begging him to get the ticket? John and his finally taking the official’s pass, buying the ticket, using his power and threatening the man at the ticket box? Anna to help Maurice, the years later discovery that she had betrayed him?

15.The night of the persecution of the Jews, the riots, the smashing of the shops, John wearing his uniform, the orders, the Jews in the trucks, his looking for Maurice, helping the man to escape?

16.His going to the film set, the film of his book, with Anna, Goebbels and his arrival, the commendation, the praise from the Fuhrer?

17.The transition to 1942, John and his authority in the party, the SS, going to inspect hospitals, the Down Syndrome adults? The viewpoints of the doctors?

18.The archives, the pride of having everybody registered, his deciding to do the test, looking for Maurice’s name, finding where he was sent?

19.John’s mother, mental condition, demands, whining, her behaviour, blunt talk about his separation, wanting to be left alone, moving to her house, the pills, wanting to die, her death and its effect on John? The reality of ideas of illness, mercy killing?

20.His being an inspector at the camps, talking with the official, the bureaucracy, not being able to find Maurice’s name, the thousands of prisoners, watching the prisoners, thinking he saw Maurice? The orchestra, his being aghast, a good man who had become complicit standing in the middle of the consequences?

21.The inaction of good people contributing to the spread of evil?

MAMMA MIA

US, 2008, 108 minutes, Colour.
Meryl Streep, Pierce Brosnan, Colin Firth, Stellan Skarsgard, Amanda Seyfried, Rachel Mc Dowall, Ashley Lilley, Julie Walters, Christine Baranski, Dominic Cooper.
Directed by Phyllida Lord.

Mamma Mia, here we go again.

The trouble is that Abba songs and their catchy tunes have been around for over three decades and they have lodged securely (and are ready for replay) in the neural grooves of those of us who are not as young as we used to be. The theatre musical that has been playing round the world for almost ten years has reinforced their popularity and with some younger audiences as well.

Mamma Mia is one film that is definitely critic-proof. Fans will want to see (and hear) it, no matter what. For those who detest Abba songs, nothing will get them to go to see it. Fair enough. But what about those of us who are stranded somewhere along the love-hate continuum? Since this reviewer finds himself there, a few comments may be in order… Comments!

The plot has been concocted along the lines of the old Hollywood musicals like Singin’ in the Rain. The songs are there, so construct a story around them. This one has the advantage of a Greek island setting which, of course, is very attractive. But the plot is built around a fairly flimsy outline: young girl about to be married finds her mother’s diary and finds that she has three possible fathers so she invites them to come to the wedding; mother is furious; the three reminisce and…

One of the problems with the film is that it starts loudly with a gaggle-giggle (the bride and her friends), then increases to shriek level (mother and her ‘old’ friends) and generally doesn’t back down. A fellow-reviewer suggested that it is really like a pantomime with characters, dialogue, songs and costumes heightened accordingly.

It is, of course, fascinating to see Meryl Streep as Donna, the mother, and listening to her sing hits like Mamma Mia itself. She has sung effectively in the past in Postcards from the Edge, Death Becomes Her and A Prairie Home Companion. The three fathers are Pierce Brosnan, Colin Firth and Stellan Skarsgaard (keeping up the Swedish connection). They seem to be enjoying themselves and doing a bit of singing – though Pierce Brosnan is no great shakes. In an interview, Meryl Streep defended him by saying that his voice was something between Tom Waites and Joe Cocker. Amanda Seyfried is very central to the proceedings as the daughter but Dominic Cooper as her fiancé does not really persuade us that he likes her let alone loves her. Christine Baranski is very good as one of Donna’s buddies and fits into the proceedings perfectly and humorously. But Julie Walters as Donna’s other friend is so hyper-hyper that she needs hosing down or should have taken a lot of tranquilisers before she came on set.

Two spoilers which fans may actually appreciate. Fernando is not in the film and, for those waiting for Waterloo to turn up, don’t despair, it does get a finale with the main cast wearing all those 1970s bright costumes and flares.

There is a lot of exuberant choreography. The whole thing is rather camp in visuals and style. But, at the end, fans are going to enjoy their favourite songs in a colourful musical.

1.The popularity of the Abba songs? The theatre version? The story? Feelgood?

2.The appeal for Abba fans? The lack of appeal for non-Abba fans?

3.The pantomime style, the plot, characters, performance, songs, costumes and décor?

4.The songs, their use throughout the film, moving the plot forward, illustrating character?

5.The plausibility of the plot: the 1970s, relationships, sexuality, pregnancy, the consequences? Donna, in Greece, her relationship with her parents, especially her mother? Her becoming pregnant? Sam leaving to go back to America and to his wife? Her being by herself? Her relationship with Sophie, bringing her up, Sophie needing to know who her father was? The invitation in her mother’s name, the acceptance, the results?

6.Sophie as the focus of the film, her song about her dream, her being in love with Sky, the decision to marry him? Deceiving her mother about the invitations? The preparation for the wedding ceremony, the dress? Her mother and her hostility towards the three men coming? Her friends and their arrival, their giggling, the secrecy? The meetings? The preparation for the stag party, the hen night? Her mother performing with her friends? Sky reacting to the news about what she had done? The wedding and seeing each of her potential fathers? Her wanting to know who would give her away? Finally asking her mother? The marriage, deciding not to marry, the reasons, the change of plans? The finale?

7.Donna, the focus of the film, Meryl Streep’s presence and performance, her life, the relationship with the three men, working at the hotel, to keep it going, the need for repairs, the cracked floor, in overalls, mending things? Sophie and the wedding? The arrival of Rose and Anita, the shrieks, the girl-talk? Discovering that the men had arrived? Her reaction? Singing ‘Mamma Mia’? Talking to Sophie? Her clashes with Sam? The discussions, the song, ‘The Winner Takes It All’? ‘The Dancing Queen’ and the fantasy? The wedding, her reaction to its being called off, Sam and his proposal? The happy ending?

8.Rose and Tanya, the friends from the past, the arrival, the ferry, Rose and her cookbook reputation, Tanya as a multi-divorcee? The arrival, the men? With Donna, the ‘Dancing Queen’ fantasy? Tanya and her jokes, with the young man, Rose and her eavesdropping, dancing on the table, proposal to Bill?

9.The girlfriends, their characters, confiding with Sophie?

10.Sky, in himself, his hopes, love for Sophie, his songs, the stag party, his reaction to being deceived, at the wedding, breaking it off?

11.The Greek background, the chorus, the men and the women, their work, their participation in the songs, the processions for ‘Dancing Queen’, on the wharf, into the water?

12.The introduction to the three men in their life situation? Harry and his work as a banker, his lonely life? Sam and the firm, his assistant? Bill, the background of adventures, with the boat? The arrival, Bill bringing them to the island? The meeting with Sophie, going to their room? Donna discovering them? The hostility? Their decision to stay, to go sailing, the discussions amongst themselves, the realisation of what had happened, the issue of giving Sophie away? Each one aware? Sam as the architect, his past, the letter to Donna, going to marry, not loving his wife, his sons, his return? Bill and the Swedish background, the life of adventure, the boat, the discussions with Harry and bringing him out of himself? Harry, the bank, having met Donna in Paris, coming to the island with her? His homosexuality, the confession to Bill, the attraction of the Greek man, the end? Their decision to be three fathers?

13.The development of the songs: Sophie and her singing ‘I Have a Dream’ at the beginning and the end, the decision to invite the men to her wedding, ‘Honey Honey’? The songs for Donna and her friends? ‘Money Money Money’? ‘Mamma Mia’? Her confiding in her friends, Chiquitita’? The fantasy and the re-creation of the past with ‘Dancing Queen’? Sophie and her singing of ‘Our Last Summer’? Sky and Sophie and their singing ‘Lay All Your Love on Me’? Donna and Tanya and Rosie and ‘Super Trouper’? The girls and the dancing with ‘Gimme Gimme Gimme’? Sophie and the singing of ‘Voulez Vous’? Sam and ‘SOS’? Pepper and Tanya and their dance on the beach, ‘Does Your Mother Know’? Sophie and singing ‘Slipping Through My Fingers’? Donna and the self-reflection in ‘The Winner Takes it All’? Finally her accepting Sam, ‘I Do, I Do, I Do, I Do, I Do’? Sam singing to Donna, ‘When All Is Said and Done’? Rosie and her trying to attract Bill, ‘Take a Chance on Me’? Sophie and her reprising ‘I Have a Dream’? The finale and the 70s flair, style with ‘Dancing Queen’ and the encore with ‘Waterloo’?

JOURNEY TO THE CENTER OF THE EARTH

US, 2008, 92 minutes, Colour.
Brendan Fraser, Josh Hutchison, Anita Briem.
Directed by Eric Brevig.

When a reviewer is surrounded by about sixty children at a press preview, the only thing to do is to surrender to the film and try to pick up the vibes of the children’s reactions. After they rightly screamed a bit at the opening nightmare and the prehistoric creatures reaching out towards their 3D glasses, they settled down and quietly and intently enjoyed the film. With some applause at the end.

It seems that the film-makers have read their target audience very well indeed. Children from about 9-14 will probably like the film a lot. Some of the fearsome creatures (with a penchant for huge teeth and snapping jaws) might be a bit much for younger audiences and the older teenagers will be off trying to see Wanted or some such adaptation of a graphic novel. Parents who go with their children will be satisfied that here is an adventure film, a family bonding film, without any crassness to disturb or upset, no icky romance – and bit of science (implausible as it actually is) that might generate its own interest and have some good study after-effect.

Well, it’s not exactly crass, but Brendan Fraser’s professor does spit his gargle straight at the audience for 3D effect (which did go over well with the young audience) and some of the creatures are also prone to that 3D spitting! When you’re on a good thing…

This is simplified Verne, far less elaborate than the popular 1959 version or the many film and television movies that have been made of Jules Verne’s classic. The core of the plot has been used her by writers Michael Weiss and the husband and wife team who adapted Nim’s Island, Jennifer Flackett and Mark Levin, but the characters have been reduced to three: Trevor, the professor who believes in the seismic theories of his disappeared brother, Max; Sean, Max’s thirteen year old son who never knew his father but misses him; and Hannah, the Icelandic guide whose father was a colleague of Max and who now shares their adventures as they set off to put the theories to the test and are quickly trapped in caves and, in trying to find their way out, fall down shafts, go on a terrific roller-coaster ride in trucks on the rails in the mine, hurtle thousands of miles down into the centre of the earth, discover sand and seas, huge rocks which float above crevices because of the magnetic field – but also giant-toothed piranhas, carnivorous plants, huge sea monsters and a rampaging T -Rex. But they are guided by some kindly and psychic phosphorescent blue birds of happiness.

The action moves quite quickly. The dangers seem real. The dinosaur would give you a fright, but the rolling magnetic stones are fascinating. The effects are, as teenagers and Kung Fu Pandas are prone to say these days, ‘awesome’.

The digital 3 D filming is of high quality, enhancing a matinee movie that succeeds in doing what it set out to do and gives entertainment pleasure to the young in heart of all ages.

1.The popularity of Jules Verne’s story? Filmed frequently for cinema and for television? A 19th century story brought into the 21st century? The credibility of the update?

2.The ordinary US life, homes, apartments, families? The contrast with scientific investigation? The contrast with Iceland and its terrain? The interiors of the earth, the caves, the mines, the shafts, the rollercoaster of carriages, the funnels, the land under the earth, the sea? The birds, the piranhas, the carnivorous plants, the dinosaur monsters, the T‑Rex? The heat, the magnesium? The geyser? The end of the story in Italy? The rousing score?

3.The 3D effects, for presenting the people, within the sets and the landscapes, the stunts, the creatures – and objects being thrown at the audience?

4.Trevor’s initial nightmare, his brother and his death, waking? The boring lecturer? His laboratory going closed down, the vengeful professor, the assistant? Going home, his sister’s arrival, Sean and his not wanting to be with his uncle? Trevor accepting him, making efforts?

5.The sister on the phone, Sean and his lack of interest, his age, missing his father? The box of his father’s possessions, the baseball glove? The copy of Jules Verne, the information written in the book, going to the laboratory, Sean becoming involved in his uncle’s enterprise, going with him to Iceland?

6.Iceland, on the plane, Googling for information, the institute? Travelling, getting lost? Meeting Hannah, her welcome? The stories, her dislike of Vernians? The decision to guide them, going on the trek?

7.The trek, the mountains, the difficulties of the terrain? The explosion, their being trapped in the cave? Using their ingenuity, Trevor being lowered on the rope, his falling, cut, landing? The others coming down, Sean and his fear, climbing down? The mineshaft, the rollercoaster of the carriers, their fall down the huge shaft, discovering the land under the earth, seeing the phosphorous and birds? The information about how to get out, forty-eight hours, the increasing heat, building the raft, sailing, the piranha fish, the sea-monsters, the magnetic stones? Discovering Max’s grave?

8.Max’s message to Sean, the bonding with his dead father? The gift of the compass? The sailing, Sean on the sail, his being blown away? The dinosaur pursuit? Using his compass, using his wits, crossing the magnetic stones, rolling with them? The bird as his guiding light? The rescue?

9.Hannah, tough, saving Trevor, her skills, her being rescued when weighed down in the water? The accompaniment through the adventures, her decision, her personality?

10.Trevor, his hating field work, bravery, his being saved by Hannah, his memories of Max, reading the book, the scientific evidence for seismic movement, the explanation of volcanoes, the lava, the heat increasing, the raft? Sailing, the danger of the fish? The search for Sean? Pursued by the dinosaur? Going to the geyser?

11.The Vernians, Jules Verne’s vision from the 19th century, used as the basis for this film, the references to the book, the illustrations of the book? What if …?

12.The physical impossibility of this kind of journey to the centre of the earth? The implausibility – for example their falling thousands of kilometres so quickly? Audiences accepting this was science fantasy?

13.Arriving in Italy, the vineyard, the owner, the diamonds – and the irony of Sean when they found the diamonds and his keeping some?

14.The film as family friendly, geared to the audience interest and expectations and involvement from ten to fourteen?

THE MUSKETEER

US, 2001, 104 minutes, Colour.
Catherine Deneuve, Mina Suvari, Stephen Rae, Tim Roth, Justin Chambers, Nick Moran, Jeremy Clyde, Michael Byrne, Jean -Pierre Castaldi.
Directed by Peter Hyams.

Judging from the publicity, one would be led to think that the distinctive feature of The Musketeer is that we now have a female musketeer. This is not quite the case, even though the publicity highlights Mena Suvari (American Beauty) as the leading character. In fact, she is a chambermaid, reminiscent of Constance in the original stories. D' Artagnan, the musketeer, is in fact a very stolid Justin Chambers who makes previous stars like Gene Kelly, Michael York and even Chris O' Donnell seem extraordinarily lively. A group of character actors portray the other musketeers. What is of interest for film viewers looking for something different from the expected plot is to see Catherine Deneuve as the Queen of France, Steven Rea as a very morose Cardinal Richelieu and Tim Roth as the arch villain Fabre, reprising all his villain roles and reminiscent of that of his outstanding performance as the villain in Rob Roy.

There is quite a lot of colour, quite a lot of action. However, as with so many of these productions, the European characters are rendered particularly American, contemporary American, which undermines the impact of the films as history or even as costume adventures.

The screenplay is not the most brilliant (and the writer Gene Quintano has contributed to some of the National Lampoon send-ups). The director is the director-cinematographer Peter Hyams who, over many decades, has made films in all kinds of genres ranging from Running Scared and the police genre to 2010 to some Jean -Claude van Damme action thrilers. Which means that this film is not a definitive musketeer film and is rather disappointing in comparison with the others.

1.The popularity of swashbuckling adventures? The plot, the intrigue, the fights, the romance?

2.The work of Alexandre Dumas, audience knowledge of the stories about the Musketeers, D' Artagnan, King Louis XIII, the queen and the Duke of Buckingham?

3.The settings, 17th century France, the court, the towns, the countryside, the castles? The musical score? The choreography of the fights?

4.The opening, D'Artagnan and his father, the Musketeers and their tradition? His father’s injury? The arrival of Febre, the issue of taxes, Febre calling D' Artagnan’s father a thief, D' Artagnan’s attack, Febre killing his parents? His vengeance because of his wound?

5.D' Artagnan, growing up, his guardians, meeting Planchet and Planchet’s protecting him? Travelling to Paris? The Musketeers and their life, his age? Devotion to the queen, the status of the queen? The retirement of the Musketeers, those imprisoned? Their spurning D' Artagnan? His interactions with them, the characters of the Musketeers, the different personalities? Their later wanting D' Artagnan to help with the rescue from prison, his not being able? His going to them to appeal to help the queen, their reluctance, the change of heart, the fights? All for one and one for all?

6.D' Artagnan, the encounter with Francesca? The dangers? The fights? Helping the king? Francesca and the queen? His being asked to go as part of the escort? The lyrical scenes, the swim, Febre arriving, the taking of Francesca? The fight with the soldiers? D' Artagnan’s escape? Confronting Richelieu? Finally confronting Febre, the fight on the ladders, Febre’s death?

7.Francesca and her work, the dangers, with the queen, the romance with D' Artagnan? Her being taken? Stepping in front of the queen, her being shot, but living?

8.The king and his weakness, the role of Richelieu, Richelieu as serious, even sour? The intrigue with the Duke of Buckingham? Richelieu’s moodiness, the queen and the plot? D' Artagnan overcoming Febre? His relationship with Febre, being controlled by him? The intrigues?

9.Richelieu and his power, over the whole of France, creating Febre and becoming his victim?

10.Febre and Tim Roth’s performance, in black, as an arch villain, his words and manner, killing D' Artagnan’s parents, revenge on D' Artagnan? The embodiment of evil? With Richelieu, controlling him? His philosophy of life, threatening to slit the throat of the little girl? His final confrontation with D' Artagnan, his fight and the death?

11.Order being restored, Richelieu and power, the role of the king and queen, the loyalty of the Musketeers? A popular story of France in the 17th century?

ESCAPADE IN JAPAN

US, 1957, 93 minutes, Colour.
Teresa Wright, Cameron Mitchell, Jon Provost, Roger Nakagawa, Philip Ober.
Directed by Arthur Lubin.

Escapade in Japan is a film about children. However, in the background are some adult themes, especially a potential divorce. However, it is in the children that most audiences will take interest. The little boy is played by Jon Provost who appeared for many years in the television series Lassie. His Japanese counterpart is played by Roger Nakagawa (but this is his only credited role).

The parents of the young boy are played by Teresa Wright and Cameron Mitchell.

The film is interesting insofar as it was released twelve years after the end of World War Two. This is a very much more sympathetic portrait of Japan than was usually presented at this period. It is an attempt at morale boosting, collaboration between Japanese and Americans.

Teresa Wright and Cameron Mitchell portray a couple who are posted to work in Japan. Their young son is on a plane which crashes into the sea. However, he survives and is picked up by a fishing family and immediately becomes friends with their young son. The son hears his parents call the police and interprets this that his American friend will be put in jail. They then go on an escapade through Japan, using their wits quite credibly and covering quite a lot of ground even to Kyoto. People are compassionate along the way, especially a group of geishas. Their anxious parents continue to follow the train and are finally reunited with their son as are the Japanese fishing couple.

The film was made in Japan itself and presents the country quite attractively as well as making up for the animosity during World War Two.

(Clint Eastwood, uncredited, can be glimpsed as one of the pilots in the rescue planes that are sent out.)

1.A film of the 50s, entertaining, for children, for adults? Adult themes?

2.The plane, Japan, travelling through Japan? Colour? Musical score?

3.1957, the memories of World War Two, Japanese -American relationships?

4.Tony and his age, being put on the flight, reading his comic books, bearing up with the crash, drifting on the raft, the rescue by the family, eager to have some food, not being afraid, not being upset, Hiko as his friend, the language difficulties, Hiko and his English? The issue of the police and his thinking he would be put in prison?

5.The Japanese family, fishing, rescuing Tony, Hiko and his immediate friendship with Tony?

6.Tony’s parents, the information about their background, the affair, the potential divorce, at the party, the gossip, the news, the mother’s anxiety? Talking with her husband? Their following the route of the boys, with the Japanese couple, the American officials? The dramatic climax, the boys on the roof and the father rescuing them?

7.The officials, the pilots, the flight control, the rescue? The officials keeping in touch with the parents? The role of the Japanese police?

8.The adventures, the escapades, the bonds between the two boys, the older protecting the younger, their walking, riding, getting lifts, the flat tyre, getting food, the compassionate people feeding Hiko and his bringing the food to Tony, sleeping in the open, getting on the bus, going on the tour, Kyoto, meeting the geishas, their being fed by the geishas, going to the strip club, on the train, meeting the kindly American soldier? Fearing the police were chasing them, going onto the roof, the rescue?

9.The film from Tony’s point of view as a child, his mother being afraid, his not being afraid and enjoying everything, and the friendship with Hiko?

10.The happy ending – and the image of international relationships through the friendship of children?

MEMORIAS DES SUBDESAROLLO (MEMORIES OF UNDERDEVELOPMENT)

Cuba, 1968, 98 minutes, Black and white.
Sergio Corrieri, Daisy Granados.
Directed by Tomas Gutierrez Alea.

Memories of Underdevelopment is considered one of the classics of the 1960s and one of the classics of Cuban cinema. It is based on a novel by Edmundo Des Noes who wrote the screenplay (and appears in the sequence where there is a discussion about round tables and democracy in Cuba). It was directed by veteran Cuban director Tomas Gutierrez Alea who began directing films in 1947 and was to continue for almost fifty years, until Guantanamo in 1995. Other classics which received worldwide attention include his Lucia and his Strawberries and Chocolate (1991), a film about gay themes, a strange film to emerge from Castro’s Cuba.

The film is poetic in style, reminiscent of a lot of the French New Wave films of the late 50s and early 1960s including Hiroshima Mon Amour.

Sergio Corrieri presents a man nearing forty who has lived in Cuba, survived the revolution but whose wife and parents are leaving for Miami. It is 1961. He decides to stay, and intellectual who has managed his father’s firm but now has income from renting apartments. We meet his friends, have connections with the film industry (including some provocative sex scenes which have been cut from films censored during the Battista era). We also see the young man in his relationships, with a young would-be actress who is mentally unstable and actually accuses him of harassment and rape. We see his wife in flashback, his relationship with a European woman and his failure to follow her to New York.

The film focuses on various themes of the revolution, the contrast with pre-revolutionary times, the new sense of freedom and yet the totalitarian atmosphere of the country. The film also moves towards the court case which is dismissed. However, the end of the drama is October 1962 and the Missiles of October, Castro’s speeches, the confrontation with the US – and the film ends with the central character pondering the future for himself and his country.

The film was released in 1968, won the international critics’ award at Karlovy Vary that year. It was not released in the United States until 1973.

1.A film of 1968, the significant year of revolutions? Released in the 70s in the United States? Its status as a film classic?

2.Cuban cinema, in the 60s, the impact of the revolution, the anticipation of a future? The film seen in retrospect of the Castro era? The work of Tomas Gutierrez Alea?

3.The black and white photography, Sergio’s narrative, the archival footage, the visual style, poetic? The musical score?

4.The adaptation of the novel, the role of the novelist, his appearance in the film? His perspective from the United States on Cuba? On the role of intellectuals? The pre-revolutionary era, the freedom in the post-revolution?

5.The situation of 1961, Fidel Castro and the impact in the 1960s after the revolution? His 1962 speech in the film? The appeal to the revolution? Watching the film with the hindsight on the Castro era?

6.The references to the Battista era, the memories, changes, freedoms? The significance of the film clips censored in the more permissive era?

7.The titles, the intellectual and his attitude towards development and underdevelopment, the cultural references? Ordinary Cubans? Intellectual Cubans? The Cubans who fled the country? Sergio’s stances, a superior stance, an elitist touch?

8.His parents leaving, 1961, the airport, the crowds of refugees, people saying goodbye, stamping the boarding passes? Laura and her sullen leaving of Sergio? His farewell to his parents? The background of their property, the shop, his working there for two years, taking over, the government taking the shop? The apartments and the rentals? The documentation that he had to fill in about his status? The letters from his mother? Memories of Laura, regrets? The marriage, the relationships and the divorce? The difficulties in his leaving the country?

9.Sergio, reading, wanting to be a writer, Pablo, his friendship, shared interests, going to the film people?

10.Elena and his encountering her, sexuality? His confession about going to prostitutes since thirteen, his relationships with women, his marriage to Laura, his love for Hannah and the joy with her, his decision not to go to America? His hopes? Elena, the meeting, the film director, audition, her singing, going to the apartment, her caution, the sexual relationship? The Pygmalion attitude, taking her to galleries, her straightening his tie rather than looking at the art? Her being a cultural lost cause?

11.Sergio and his being idle, going to bookshops, the film and the cuts by the censor? Wandering the city, observing?

12.Elena’s brother, the attack, Sergio and his reaction, his fears, willing to marry Elena? The parents and their anger and physical attacks on him? Elena’s lies?

13.The hearing, audience sympathy for Sergio, the testimony, Elena and her mental condition, the judgment of the court? The truth? The reading out of the decision?

14.Sergio free, but his age, prospects?

15.The October sequences, the missiles, the Soviet link, the confrontation with the US? Castro and his stances? The sudden ending – and the prospect for Cubans in the aftermath of the missiles crisis and during the Castro regime?

THE FORBIDDEN KINGDOM

US, 2008, 113 minutes, Colour.
Jet Li, Jackie Chan, Michael Angorano, Yifei Liu, Collin Chou.
Directed by Rob Minkoff.

Kung Fu Panda would have martial arts appeal to children’s audiences. The Forbidden Kingdom has a similar kind of story but is geared towards the teenage audience (and is not as funny!).

There is huge marquee value in having Jackie Chan and Jet Li together in a Kung Fu movie and they live up to their appeal. Jackie Chan is not as young as he used to be and, while he does get into the action, and vigorously, he plays the master role this time. Jet Li did announce his retirement from these films a year or two ago, but obviously he has been persuaded to come out fighting one more time.

After a prologue with Li as the Monkey King, the Great Sage, clashing with foes, we are in South Boston where a group of vicious toughs are threatening young Jason (Michael Angareno) and assaulting the old Chinese man who owns a shop with souvenirs, combat DVDs and so on (Jackie Chan again). Then, suddenly, we are in a very picturesque China, mountains, valleys and deserts where a bewildered Jason cannot communicate with anyone until he encounters a drinking warrior who turns out to be an immortal (Jackie Chan). They team up with a monk warrior (Jet Li) and a young girl out for vengeance against the war lord who has killed her parents.

Jason has to do lots and lots of backbreaking training – with both master and monk training him. Eventually, they reach the war lord’s kingdom and battles, many battles (with athletic martial choreography) ensue. There is also a female villain, young but with white hair (which itself is at times quite lethal).
A PG action film and a chance to see Chan and Li together.

1.The appeal of the martial arts? The tradition of Chinese and Hong Kong martial arts films? The two stars? Working together? Drawing on Chinese myths and stories?

2.The target audience, the young audience, able to identify with Jason? For Chinese audiences, Americans, worldwide?

3.The beauty of the Chinese locations, the mountains, villages, the deserts? The interiors of palaces? The contrast with Boston, the slums, the streets, the shop? The musical score?

4.The title, the focus on the Monkey King, the Jade Emperor? The Jade Warlord? The Immortals? The adaptation of the Chinese stories to the present – and to the American sensibility?

5.The opening, the introduction of the Monkey King, the fight? Jason waking? At home, his room, the martial arts posters, going to the shop, the DVDs, old Hop? Encountering the bullies, their confrontation, hitting him? Persuading him to go to the shop? The robbery, the shooting? Blaming himself? The importance of the golden staff and old Hop wanting him to get it back to its rightful place?

6.Jason, waking up, his robes, in China, difficulties with language, the encounter with Lu Yan, drunk, drunken kung-fu style? The battle? The talk, the journey?

7.The encounter with the silent monk? His mission? Accompanying them on their journey? The monk and Lu Yan, antagonism?

8.The confrontations, the pursuing soldiers, the fights and the choreography of the stunt work?

9.The training of Jason, arduous, repetitious, the role of the monk, the role of Lu Yan, the role of Golden Sparrow? Ultimate success?

10.The two masters, their clashing, beginning to understand, becoming friends, Lu Yan and his drinking, the silent monk not drinking?

11.The Golden Sparrow, her story, the death of her parents, her motivations, joining them on the quest, her intentions for revenge, the discussions about vengeance?

12.The white-haired witch, her mission, the attack, the fights, wanting the elixir of life? The clash with Jason and fighting with him? The clash with Lu Yan? The entanglement of her hair, over the side of the wall, the falling to her death?

13.The staff, Jason and his concern, going to the palace on his own, captured by the Jade Warlord, the confrontation, his being set up to fight the white-haired witch? The choreography of the fight?

14.The build-up to the clash, the battles, the Monkey King and his being restored, the Jade Warlord and his death?

15.The appearance of the Jade Emperor, the Monkey King, Lu Yan becoming one of the Immortals?

16.The return to Boston, the ambulance, old Hop going to hospital, the young girl (the same actress as the Golden Sparrow), her looking at Jason? The confrontation with the bullies, Jason and his skills, the others running away, the collapse of the main bully? Jason and his sense of achievement and his future?

WHITE ZOMBIE

US, 1932, 68 minutes, Black and white.
Bela Lugosi, Madge Bellamy, Joseph Cawthorne, Robert Frazer, John Harran, Brandon Hearst.
Directed by Victor Halperin.

White Zombie is a Bela Lugosi star vehicle made soon after his international success as Dracula.

By now, although perhaps not in the 1930s, this is a familiar story of the Living Dead on a Caribbean island. Two young people, about to be married, land on the island and are attacked by the Living Dead. The owner of the mansion to which they are going has eyes for the young woman and employs Bela Lugosi as the manager of a sugar farm worked by zombies to destroy her and turn her into a zombie. He is successful – but the earnest young man gets the aid of a missionary and they finally confront Lugosi. In the meantime, he has paralysed and made mute the rival for the young woman. With the death of the murderer, the young woman is freed and there is a happy ending.

The film is strong on atmospherics, has some scary moments and some special effects. This kind of story became much more prominent. The classic is the Val Lewton -produced I Walked With a Zombie from the 1940s. Wes Craven ventured into this territory in the 1980s with The Serpent and the Rainbow.

1.A horror classic from the 1930s? The popularity of Living Dead themes? The popularity of Bela Lugosi? Bela Lugosi and his screen presence, his appearance, face, hairstyle? The echoes of Dracula? Sinister, his glazed eyes, his intensity, his interior feelings?

2.The black and white photography, the sound-stage sets? The Caribbean, the island, the jungle, the mansion, the sugar factory, the beaches and the coast and cliffs? The musical score?

3.The title, its evocation of the Living Dead? For Madeleine and her fate?

4.Madeleine and Neil, coming to the Caribbean, meeting Charles Beaumont, the invitation to his house, the arrival? The attack on the carriage by the Living Dead? The meeting with the missionary? The preparations for the wedding, the wedding? The celebration, Madeleine and her collapse, her funeral? Neil and his grief? Going to Doctor Bruner for help?

5.Charles Beaumont, friendly, owner of the plantation? With Silver the butler and his orders? The invitation to Madeleine and Neil? Meeting with Legendre and the sinister plan? The wedding, the collapse of Madeleine? Beaumont having Madeleine in his power? Legendre turning against him, the toast, the poison, his being made mute? The final confrontation with Legendre and killing him?

6.Legendre, Bela Lugosi’s style and presence? His plantation, his turning victims into the Living Dead? The scenes of their work at the sugar mill? His mind control over them? The attack on the carriage? The further attacks, their being impervious to bullets?

7.Neil, Doctor Bruner, the pursuit of Madeleine? On the beach, the confrontation with Legendre? Legendre’s death? The restoration of Madeleine?

8.Silver the butler, Legendre’s control over him, his death, being carried away by the zombies, thrown into the river, his death?

9.The picturing of the zombies, the variety, their attacks, at the behest of Legendre?

10.The popular ingredients of this kind of Living Dead story? The basic elements in the 1930s? The way they were developed over the succeeding decades?

A BRIDGE TOO FAR

UK, 1977, 175 minutes, Colour.
Dirk Bogarde, James Caan, Michael Caine, Sean Connery, Edward Fox, Elliott Gould, Gene Hackman, Anthony Hopkins, Hardy Kruger, Ryan O’ Neal, Laurence Olivier, Robert Redford, Maximilian Schell, Liv Ullmann, Denholm Elliott, Jeremy Kemp, Wolfgang Preiss, Nicholas Campbell, Ben Cross.
Directed by Richard Attenborough.

A Bridge Too Far is based on the book by journalist Cornelius Ryan (author of The Longest Day). It was adapted for the screen by William Goldman (Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid, Marathon Man). It was directed by Richard Attenborough. Richard Attenborough had been an actor in British films since the 1940s and a significant presence. He began directing in 1969 with Oh, What a Lovely War, following it with Young Winston in 1972. At the same time as A Bridge Too Far he made the smaller-budget Magic with Anthony Hopkins. Five years later he was to release Gandhi and won an Oscar as best director as well as the film being best film.

The film is lavish in its re-creation of the battles in Holland – the attempt of Operation Market Garden to secure the bridges of Holland to prevent the Germans moving back into the west. However, the action was doomed – the Arnhem bridge was a bridge too far and the divisions of Germans put up stern resistance.

The film has an over-starstudded cast – enabling audiences to identify the characters, their roles, their influence on the battles. The film also shows the collaboration between British, Americans and Poles. It also shows some of the ordinary life of Dutch citizens experiencing the battles after the occupation.

The film was not so well received at the time – but, in retrospect, it is a very interesting portrait of a significant part of World War Two in Continental Europe.

1.The impact of the film? As a piece of history? Historical re-creation of events? A war spectacle? The interpretation of war and the failed Operation Market Garden?

2.The importance of the locations, the film giving a great deal of information, maps, voice-over commentary? An authentic feel? The use of widescreen colour? The rousing score?

3.The experience of World War Two from 1939 to 1944? The experience of D-Day?, the pushback of the Germans? The occupation of Holland, the strategies, the bridges across the rivers? The battles to push back the Germans?

4.War heroics, the various personalities, the stars portraying them? As persons, as military authorities and strategists? Their views on the operation – for it, pessimistic about it? The issues of collaboration with Americans and British? The national feel? The surveillance of Holland, the photography, the planes, the air tableaux? The symphonic presentation of flight and battles?

5.The range of stars, their identities, contribution to the plot? The effect?

6.The presentation of the Germans, their experience of the war, the beginnings of defeat, the presentation of the German officers, the skills of the soldiers? The strategies? The personalities of the German leaders?

7.The British and their control, the overall leadership, the British military officials, the presentation of the plans, the issue of morale, responsibilities, the ultimate failure of the plan, the bridge too far?

8.The background of the Scots and their presence in the war? The Poles and the background of moving from Poland? Their participation in the operation?

9.The contrast with the Americans, the variety of types, even caricature of military types, cigar-chomping etc? Their responsibilities? Seeing them in action?

10.Dirk Bogarde as Lieutenant-General? Browning: in himself, relationships with his staff, the nature of the discussions, discussions with Sosabowski? With Urquhart? With Horrocks, with Frost? The plan, the response?

11.Frost: Anthony Hopkins, his role, skills, the situation, the end?

12.Horrocks and his bluff style? Headquarters, morale, the plan, involvement?

13.Gene Hackman as Sosabowski, the role of the Poles, seeing them in action?

14.Urquhart, his character, his work?

15.Vandeleur? His action, character, role?

16.James Caan as the staff sergeant, representing the ordinary men, his work with his fellow soldiers? Robert Redford as Gavan, the river, the action sequences?

17.The Dutch people, represented by Doctor Spaander? By Kate? The ordinary Dutch people, the Resistance, the occupation by the Nazis, the attempt to get the Arnhem bridge? The Dutch and the participation, observation?

18.The range of stars, their portraying meteorological officers? Brigadier Gavan? Major-General? Ludwig?

19.The Germans, their skills, the confrontation with the forces in Holland? The outcome of the war?

20.The impact of this kind of spectacle? Dramatising war? A memory of World War Two and a tribute to those involved?