SUGARTIME

US, 1995, 111 minutes, Colour.
John Turturro, Mary -Louise Parker, Elias Koteas, Maury Chaykin.
Directed by John N. Smith.

The title of Sugartime comes from the song by the Mc Guire Sisters, ‘Sugar in the morning, sugar in the evening …’ This is a film about crime boss Sam Giancana (who was famous for having a relationship with Judy Campbell who was also having a relationship with John F. Kennedy). Phyllis Mc Guire was the lead singer in the Mc Guire Sisters, very popular in the 1960s.

The film focuses on their relationship with the background of crime. It is not particularly a gangster film – this is just the context for the relationship story.

John Turturro (very different from the real Giancana who was short and bald) is Giancana. Mary -Louise Parker is Phyllis Mc Guire. There is also a performance by Maury Chaykin as Tony Accardo who ruled a crime syndicate for fifty years with Giancana as one of his associates.

The film was directed by a Canadian John N. Smith who directed Dangerous Minds as well as the two miniseries on The Boys of St Vincent.

1. A successful telemovie? Interest? A piece of Americana? The crime syndicates? The world of show business? The interconnecting between the two? The background of American politics, the FBI, John F. Kennedy’s connection?

2. The 1960s and 1970s, the world of Las Vegas, the Senate inquiries, crime and wealth?

3. The musical score, the various songs? The McGuire? Sisters? The lyrics?

4. The work of Robert Kennedy, his attacks on Sam Giancana? Giancana taking the Fifth Amendment? The Kennedys and their government, the FBI, the background of Joseph Kennedy and his illegal dealings? The setting up of Las Vegas, the Chicago gangs? Shrimps etc? The robberies, the dealings with the CIA? Castro? The FBI and grand juries? Giancana and his being found guilty of contempt? Prison for eight years – and his transfer to Mexico?

5. John Turturro as Giancana? As a Chicago thug, as a lieutenant in the mobs? His violence, the knife? His orders, control? His henchmen? Autocratic behaviour? His wealth, buying his daughters what they wanted? The sense of family? The Mafia codes?

6. The contrast with the world of Phyllis Mc Guire, as a singer, on tour, dressing rooms, stage? The gifts? Dinner with Giancana? His pursuit? Her motivation? The hotel and the beds, the car gift? The affair? Their being besotted with each other? The shows? Venice, love, the significance of Giancana’s control, the family? Phyllis’s relationship with Giancana’s family, his daughters? The passing of time, London and her anger? her visit to Giancana?

7. Phyllis as a star, her sisters, the performances, their reaction to Giancana? Her sisters’ warning? The night, the car? Their mother, Phyllis’s life *(or laugh/love? Unclear) Wanting independence? Dan Rowan, the opportunities? The visit, Phyllis alone?

8. The portrayal of Accardo? His real-life role with the mob? As presented here, a minor figure, subordinate to Giancana? The Mafia henchmen, their brutality, torture and bashing, cheating? The character of Butch, his role, relationship with Accardo?

9. The film as a gangster story? The film as a love story? How well did the film blend warmth and the reality of crime? All the more horrifying for that? Crime and profit? The reality of the investigations into the mob and the implications?

SWEET ANGEL MINE

UK/Canada, 1996, 88 minutes, Colour.
Oliver Millburn, Alberta Watson, Margaret Langrick, Anna Massey.
Directed by Curtis Radclyffe.

Sweet Angel Mine is a Canadian/British co-production, a focus on a sinister house. A young man in search of his father encounters a young woman who is psychologically terrorised by her mother. He tries to rescue her.

The film stars British Oliver Milburn and Anna Massey with Canadian Alberta Watson. It was directed by Curtis Radclyffe, his sole effort at film-making until 2007 with The Sick House.

The film is strong on atmosphere – a genre film that will satisfy its targeted audience.

1. The blend of horror and menace? Credible? Contrived characters and plot?

2. The title, the mother-daughter relationship?

3. The Nova Scotia settings and atmosphere: the sea, the shore, the loneliness, the town? The musical score?

4. The background, the credits and the chase, the kill? The disappearance and search?

5. Paul as a character, coming to the town, the police, the beach? His meeting with Rauchine? The house and its sinister atmosphere? The work, the meal? Dreams? Sex and violence? The threats, the escape and Rauchine? The attack, the shooting? The return? Tied up, the crucifix, the torture? Rauchine and death? The escape?

6. Megan in herself, work, alone, her talking with her mother? Rauchine and the bond? The angel, the discipline? Paul, work, meal, dreams, vengeance? Rauchine gone? The return, telling the truth, madness, torture, truth and death?

7. Rauchine, sheltered? The beach, the tree? At home, her work? Relationship with her mother? Ordinary life, the meals, the dress? Leaving? The bar and the rape? Her naivety? Sex and the return? The truth, saved?

8. The ghost and the presence of the ghost? Talk, fate and vengeance? The man, the sexual approach, death? The skeleton?

9. The role of the police, inquiries, death?

10. The group, the wild man and the attack? Wanting the bike? The couple at the bar, the photos?

11. A sinister atmosphere, sexuality and violence, sin and retribution?

SHOW PEOPLE

US, 1928, 82 minutes, Black and white.
Marion Davies, William Haines.
Directed by King Vidor.

Show People is one of King Vidor’s silent films at the beginning of the sound era. He had made some classic silent films including The Big Parade and The Crowd. His output during the 1930s was more quiet though he made Stella Dallas. In the 1940s he made North West Passage and the melodramatic Duel in the Sun, Beyond the Forest and The Fountain Head. He also made a number of films during the 1950s including War and Peace. His last major film was Solomon and Sheba.

Show People is what the title indicates. It is said that the plot is based on the career of Gloria Swanson. Marion Davies portrays Peggy Pepper, brought from Georgia to Hollywood by her father to be a star. She meets Billy Boone (William Haines) and plays with him in a number of comedies. However, she wants to go more upmarket, changes her name, achieves some fame – but, when she is ousted, she finds support in Billy.

The film was a star vehicle for Marion Davies who made a number of light comic films. However, she is best known as being the mistress of William Randolph Hearst and as being the subject of Citizen Kane.

1. The work of King Vidor in the silent era? His skills? The silent techniques? His vision of Hollywood in the 1920s?

2. The re-creation of Hollywood, studios and sets, locations? The black and white photography? The editing?

3. The title, expectations?

4. Peggy as a character, her relationship with her father, life in Georgia? The trip to Hollywood, the studios, the interviews, the casting? Her meeting with Billy, the food, the hopes? Peggy as a simple young girl? The influence of her father?

5. Her appearing in the comedies with Billy, comedy in the water, reactions, Billy’s help? The trouper? The sneak preview? John Gilbert’s presence? Art and acting? Her success? Silent comedy?

6. The interviews with the show people, Elinor Glyn, Peggy being interviewed with Marion Davies and the humour? Andre? Art and film? Her changing her name to Peppoire? Going on without Billy? The new style of film-making, dinners? Her saying no to her father and to Billy?

7. Billy and his routines? Dad and the meals? The farce, the sets, Billy talking? Her reactions? Andy and his presence in her life?

8. Peggy’s tantrums, the dinner and Douglas Fairbanks, the producer and getting the sack, not hearing? The wedding? Billy and the confrontation? The water and the pies?

9. The making of a King Vidor film? Billy and Peggy? The end and Vidor leaving?

10. The short history of Hollywood by 1928 – and already building up folklore, a style of Hollywood stories?

SUR MES LEVRES (READ MY LIPS)

France, 2001, 118 minutes, Colour.
Vincent Cassel, Emmanuelle Devos.
Directed by Jacques Audiard.

Sur Mes Levres is an excellent drama. It focuses on Emmanuelle Devos (who won the Cesar for best actress) as a thirty-five-year-old loyal employee of a company. She feels she is in a rut, especially because she is deaf although she can read lips. She hires a young man, played by Vincent Cassel, who is a thief just out of jail. She hopes to make his life better. However, he drags her into his life.

The film is well written and directed by Jacques Audiard who has written a number of films and directed only a few. However, his A Self- Made Hero and The Beat That My Heart Skipped are considered classics of modern French cinema.

1. The impact of the drama? The workplace? Crime? The portrait of characters and motivation?

2. The Parisienne settings, authentic feel, the companies, the sites, the clubs, homes? The musical score?
The title, the focus on Carla, her being deaf, her skills in lip-reading, this being effective to contribute to the plot?

3. Psychological sound – Carla in her world, her work, her growing resentments, her being used? Her hiring Paul? His criminal background? Her trying to own him and change him? In relationship to Paul, his needs, the lies and the work, the plans? The detection, owing so much to Paul, his using her? The effect of their combined personalities as one personality in the crime?

4. The portrait of Carla, her age, experience, her appearance (the clothes and the mirror), her hearing aids, turning them on and off? At work, her skills, the people who mocked her? Her sense of being alone, loneliness? Her friend and the sexual relationship? The confrontation about the file? Her role in employing people and her expectations? Her seeing Paul, the reaction? Hiring him, letting him be? Helping him with the job? The closet, the apartment? Going to the party? His automatically thinking the liaison was to be sexual? Her being used to steal the file, getting the job? The record of bribes? Her participation in the crime? The relationship with Paul? Her future?

5. Paul and his background, prison? Masson? The job and the lie? Work, the closet, the apartment? His interest in Carla, the party, the sexual liaison? The bashing? The Marchand situation? The bar and the plan?

6. Carla and her help, the club, her not being used, the rape attack? On the roof, her skill in reading the lips, collaboration and deception? Yet her work being good? Tough on the supplier?

7. Masson, the gang, the plans, the robbery, the money, the after-effect? Paul and the bashing? The torture? Masson and his wife, the fight? Paul and the ticket, Carla and the money, the lies about the mistress?

8. The culmination, Masson cuffed, Paul free? The killing of Bros? Paul and Carla with the money?

9. Masson and the sub-theme, his arrest – love?
10. Carla and Paul matched, the achievement, life and their future?

11. How well did the film work as a crime drama? Relationship drama? Psychological study?

YOUNG @ HEART

US, 2007, 108 minutes, Colour.
Directed by Stephen Walker.

The Young at Heart Chorus has been well documented for television since its inception in 1982. Now there is a joyful film that has great appeal. It is an exuberant performance by the cast and an exhilarating experience for the audience.

When is old? What is old? Not just chronological age.

A group of senior citizens were gathered together by a young conductor, Bob Cilman, who, at 53, is still just under 30 years younger than the average age, 81, of the members of the chorus.

The opening of the film puts us on full alert as Eileen Hill (later revealed as 92) gives her all to a live performance of the Clash's 'Should I stay or should I go'. This is not your ordinary musical. This is not your ordinary concert movie.

Director Stephen Walker and a British crew stayed with the Chorus in the early months of 2006 and followed their almost two months rehearsal period, the rehearsals themselves, and some biographical pieces on some of the prominent singers. They live in Northhampton, Massachussets, and have toured Europe and been to Australia. They are a fine example of men and women who, even though sometimes disabled or terminally ill, have a zest for life. Their energetic singing – and some limited swaying and dancing – means that they are alive in body as well as soul.

While many of them declare a love of classical musical, they actually perform a wide range of songs from more recent decades. They sing James Brown. They sing Cold Play. And, bring to life the songs they certainly do. To watch them rehearse and finally perform 'I Feel Good' (with the elderly man finally remembering most of his lyrics and the elderly woman finding her rhythm at last) is energising for those of us just sitting in cinema seats.

The old people love what they are doing. They may have their cantankerous moments (though we don't see all that many) but these are not important when they see themselves as a group collaborating and sharing song and joy. Bob Cilman has to be tough and demanding – and makes them rehearse and rehearse Schizophrenia (which they initially don't like) and 'If you can, can...' (which, with its 71 'cans', some think is too difficult to remember and enunciate at tongue-twister speed).

The personal stories are wonderful to listen to, good, decent folk (as the Americans might describe them) with their families and their histories and some extraordinary courage in the face of cancer treatment and death.

The film ends with the concert – which makes you wish you had been there to see the Chorus and hear them. The rendition of Cold Play's 'Fix it' rendered powerfully and in fine voice by a very large elderly man, seated and with an oxygen cylinder beside him means that no-one should give up on life.

1.The appeal, the humanity, the elderly, music, verve?

2.The documentary style – but intimate storytelling?

3.The idea of Young at Heart: the creator, the 80s, with other groups, the elderly, their enthusiasm, the group going alone, its range of songs, the
tours, international experience? Spirit and inspiration?

4.The range of the songs, the composers, composers like The Clash, ColdPlay? …? The style of the songs, the interpretation, the voices? The musical back-up?

5.Bob Cilman and his character, age, younger than the singers? His choice of songs, his treatment of the group, the rehearsals, strong and persevering? His concern, illness and death? The exuberance of the concert?

6.The structure, the six weeks of rehearsal, introducing the characters, their lives, illnesses and deaths? Performances?

7.The introduction, Eileen Hall singing ‘Should I Stay Or Should I Go’? The effect? Introducing the audience to the elderly, their singing, style? Audiences identifying with them?

8.The Young at Heart group as a whole, the average age of eighty-one, the demands on them, the effect, the physical demands and their feeling alive? Psychological demands? Emotional? Creating the bonds between the members?

9.The two elderly men who were ill, their families, the rehearsals, Joe on the poster? The visits by the director? The interviews, their talking about life and death, their singing? The deaths? The response of the group?

10.James Brown’s song, ‘I Feel Good’? The rehearsal, the woman and her not getting the rhythms, the man and his not being able to remember the lines? Their final performance and success?

11.‘Schizophrenia’, their reaction to the choice, their rehearsals, eventually performing it?

12.‘I’m Fine’? The duet, the death of the singer, the man performing alone, the strong voice, on stage in his wheelchair, the oxygen? The impact on the audience?

13.The three driving, elderly, chatting?

14.The families, inviting the director to meals? Opening up about their lives?

15.The range of members, their experience, their work, military?

16.The holiday break, the need for rehearsals? The pressures on the group?

17.The prison concert, the songs, the reaction of the prisoners, meeting the members of the choir?

18.The final concert, the exuberant audience, the strong performances, success?

19.The moral of the story – never too late?

TICKETS

Italy/UK, 2005, 110 minutes, Colour.
Carlo Delle Piane, Valeria Bruni Tedeschi, Silvana De Santis, Filippo Trojano, Martin Compston, William Ruane, Gary Maitland.
Directed by Ermanno Olmi, Abbas Kiarostami, Ken Loach.

The three directors had never met before they began this project. Ermanno Olmi, celebrated Italian director since the 1960s (Tree of Wooden Clogs, Legend of the Holy Drinker), told a producer that the directors he admired were the Iranian Abbas Kierostami (Through the Olive Grove, The Taste of Cherry) and England’s Ken Loach (Raining Stones, Ladybird Ladybird, Ae Fond Kiss). What if they were to make a film together? The result is Tickets. The action all takes place during a train journey from Austria to Rome.

The first part concerns an academic who has to go home by train because of an air strike. He remembers with fondness the kind PR woman who befriends him, buys him his ticket and stays talking with him while the departure is delayed. This is a miniature portrait as the professor sits in the dining car, reflecting. He also becomes aware of bullying military personnel and a migrant family they are pushing around. The family will reappear in the third part. This story is principally that from Olmi.

The second part is the most dramatically powerful. It is also striking in the way it is filmed despite the action being confined to carriages and corridors. This is principally the contribution of Kierostami (making a rare production outside Iran). The plot concerns an obnoxious (exceedingly), large, middle-aged widow of a general travelling to his memorial service accompanied by an increasingly put upon young man doing his national service. She wants a seat at any cost and makes a scene when the businessmen whose seats she has taken (in first class despite her second class ticket) want to claim them. She is haughty, surly, tries emotional blackmail and immovable stubbornness. When she does get a compartment to herself, she constantly and intrusively demands the attention of the young man who chats in the corridor to a young girl from his town. Eventually it is too much for him. Though she is monstrous in her behaviour, the final image of her, sitting bewildered on her cases alone on a platform, shows how pitiable she really is. Silvana de Santis is completely convincing as the woman.

The third story is unmistakeably Ken Loach. It was written by his now long-time collaborator, Paul Laverty. Two of the boys from Loach-Laverty’s? Glasgow-set Sweet Sixteen appear as supermarket Celtic supporters on their way to a match in Rome. Their encounter is with the migrant family and their upset when one of their tickets is stolen. They squabble harshly amongst themselves but the pleading of the young woman with a baby makes them pause (they would have done the same themselves in similar situations they realise) but they are not sure what the truth is. The ending is happy, even triumphant, though cheeky and anti-authority.

Audiences can identify with the characters and the situations, observing fellow passengers, seats wrongly occupied, lost tickets… This is a microcosm portrait by three distinguished film artists.

1.The train, the journey, the situation, the interwoven stories? Italy? Universal?

2.The directors and their reputations, their style, perspectives on humanity? Psychological, social?

3.The situation: the security, the personnel, the slow journey of the train, the search, the manner of the security guards? The passengers’ reactions? The framework for the stories?

4.The professor’s story: Italian, Italian sensibility? The professor and his age, his background, pharmacology? His visit to Austria, the cancellation of the plane, the woman organising his trip by train? His having to get back for his grandchild’s party? The laptop, his trying to compose the letter, his awkwardness? The noise in the train, the atmosphere of the range of noises? Disturbing him? The soldier, speaking English only? The mother, the milk, the professor buying her more? His memories and reveries, the CD player, Chopin, the memories of his childhood, the piano, the girls playing the piano? Nostalgia? His reveries about the woman, imagining her? Attracted, emotions?

5.The woman, guardian angel for the professor, the booking, his imagining having meals with her, her getting the reservation for him, organising his meals on the train? Imagining the candlelit meals?

6.The woman’s story: her age, her attendant, her brusque manner, personality, haughty, dealing with people, continually rude, insulting? The clash with the man about the mobile phone? Her reserved seat and the passengers challenging her? Her being upset, interrogating people? Her attendant, his role, in the corridor, chatting with the girl, the links with his past, family, girlfriend? The woman’s reaction, angry, jealous? Their clash and the argument? Her getting off the train alone? The perspective of Abbas Kiarostami, Iran?

7.The Scots story: the fans of Celtic, their noise, enthusiasm, in the restaurant car, their sandwiches, the boy, his Beckham shirt, giving him the sandwich, their generosity? Their chats together, their characters? Discovering the loss of the ticket, confronting the boy, discussions with his family, sympathy? The Albanian background? Not knowing whether they were a con family or genuine? Rome, the tickets, the police chase, the locals helping them, running and evading the police? Ken Loach’s social perspective?

8.The omnibus story, its unity, the diversity, the age of the central characters, gender, nationalities? Unity in human nature?

HADISFELD (HUDDERSFIELD)

Serbia, 2008, 95 minutes, Colour.
Vojin Cetkovic.
Directed by Ivan Zikvocic.

Hadisfeld is based on a play which has been opened up somewhat for the screen. It is in the tradition of reunions where people tell the truth to one another in harsh, even vicious ways. This is the tradition of such plays and films as Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf and, particularly, Hurly Burly.

The title refers to one of the characters living in Yorkshire in Huddersfield. He returns to pay a visit after eleven years and meets up with school friends. The central character is a nihilist, doesn’t work, is critical of everyone, lectures and tutors, has one of his students as a lover, works at a local radio (*station?) and is abusive to guests. The film focuses on him and he has the main thrust of aggression towards all the characters. Another character is a yuppy friend. There is also the young student girl. However, there is a redeemer figure, in the tradition of the Holy Fool, a thirty-three-year-old man who has been in an institution, is on a pension, has intuitions, has been baptised in the Orthodox church, wants to write poetry. He suffers a great deal from insults and criticism – but is always resilient and offers some kind of hope. (However, in the central character’s dream, he is actually stabbed to death by this character – something which alarms him and moves him towards some kind of self-awareness.)

The film is very rough, brutal, earthy in a very Serbian way. It is of interest to outsiders for observation – and may be therapeutic, cathartic for a Serb audience, especially the thirtysomethings.

1.A Serbian experience, the 21st century and the history in the 1990s, the Serb psyche?

2.An original play, a verbal experience, intensity? The interiors, its being opened up – the Huddersfield sequences? The streets and restaurant?

3.The play and its dialogue, Serbian earthiness and ugliness, the coarse language, verbal abuse, conflict, bitterness and nihilism? Drinking, sexuality, bodily functions? Violent clashes, verbal aggression?

4.The psychological aspects: rage, despair, the thirtysomethings, ambitions and lack of ambitions, relationships and lack of relationships, callow, vicious? Philosophical implications: materialism, its inadequacy, scepticism, the possibilities of the transcendent or not, religious and spirituality? Hopelessness or hope?

5.The title, the migrants to the UK, Igor, his life in Huddersfield, success, the Yorkshire opening, the contrast with Serbia and the homes, streets, the radio station? The score?

6.Rasha as the focus, age, anger, his drunken father, the apartment, slobbish way of life, the toilet and the door, Mila and the sex? Study, the radio and the brutal criticism of the novelist? Serbian nationalism? Ivan and his listening, the poetry, the gift of the sculpture, the gift of the book and the analysis of sinfulness and the ways for sinning? Rasha and his meeting his friends, the reunion, drinking, the drugs, the shared experiences, memories of school friends, Rasha and his disinterest? The building up of the insults? The focus on Dule, bravado, his talk about sex, work, the ketchup on his shirt? Igor and UK, steadiness, the fiancée, Poland? Ivan and his visits, Rasha and the brutal criticism, the taunts, Mila and the playing of the video, her leaving, his ousting his friends? Alone? The dream, Ivan talking about demons, stabbing him? His waking, the father and the ketchup, Ivan and his visit, the gifts, the possibilities for redemption?

7.The character of Igor, the UK, steady job, fiancée, his return, hopes, enjoyment of the evening, his ultimate disappointment and shock at Rasha?

8.Dule and his life, talk, work, sex, callow, the shirt and the ketchup, the drugs, his being shocked by Rasha?

9.Mila, young, the crush on Rasha, forward, callow, sex, her reaction to Ivan, ridiculing him, talking with him? The videotape of her parents? Rasha playing it and her being upset?

10.Ivan, in the flashbacks, in the institution, the way of life, regimented, the meals? His mother and her odd behaviour? His pension? Poetry, writing, books, his religious search, the baptism? Going to Rasha, helping Rasha’s father with the door, the poem Snail, the sculpture gift, Mila and talking with her, his realising he would have no family? Being attacked, accepting it, offering an apology? His appearance in Rasha’s dream, stabbing him? Yet a mediator, a Holy Fool?

11.The parent generation: Rasha’s father, drinking, rehab, taking the door, insulting his son, selling the car and the door? Ivan’s mother, the automaton, watching television?

12.The impact of the film and the point of view of the audience on Serbia and recent Serbian

NACHT VOR AUGEN (A HERO’S WELCOME)

Germany, 2008, 91 minutes, Colour.
Hanno Koffler.
Directed by Brigitte Maria Bertelle.

Nacht Vor Augen is a topical film for German audiences at the beginning of the 21st century. It concerns Germany’s involvement in world peace and peacekeeping, especially NATO forces in Afghanistan.

The English title refers to the return of a young man from service in Afghanistan. At first, all seems well. His girlfriend receives him very enthusiastically, his mother is delighted, his half-brother idolises him. He makes contacts with his friends. However, there is a tension, an inner rage which begins to manifest itself. In discussions with the authorities, it emerges that there is a cover-up and he was responsible for some violence in Afghanistan. Finally, this is revealed – his telling it to his card-playing friends who either ignore it, make jokes or don’t believe him.

One of the main focuses of the film is the soldier’s relationship with his young half-brother, taunting him on the one hand, helping him to play soccer and be aggressive on the other. It is part of a psychological game that could possibly lead to the little boy shooting his half-brother.

After alienating everyone, and the revelation of his having shot an Afghan boy who was taunting the troops, he finally accepts going into therapy. The film ends, briefly, after the therapy, with a new return home, a more moderate reception by his girlfriend and his half-brother – and the possibility of some kind of exorcising of his demons and some peace.

1.The 21st century wars, the peacekeeping forces, preparation or lack of preparation of the troops, the stress in Afghanistan, the consequences? Violence?

2.The German background, the average German town, the ordinary families, jobs, sports? Typical?

3.The flashbacks and the suggestion of what happened in Afghanistan, especially the presence of the taunting young boy?

4.The title, David and his work as a peacekeeper, the return home, the German background? Young, a hero’s welcome, the ironies, his treatment by the military forces, by his family?

5.David and his age, his previous work, his friends? His returning home and Kirsten’s greeting, his mother, stepfather, Benni? His anger at home before leaving for Afghanistan? The soccer hero, the girlfriend, his friends, work? Coming home, finding the new address, Kirsten and her reaction? His reserve, wanting to be alone, tense, the awkwardness with his mother, the aggression towards his stepfather, his nastiness towards Benni? Putting the audience on edge?

6.The military, the ambiguity of what had happened, the interview, signing the papers, the recommendation about the therapist? His being called a hero, the medal? Being told to be silent, for the sake of honour? His rashness in telling Kirsten, Kirsten and her announcement at the party, the stepfather writing the article? The displeasure of the authorities, their reaction, David wanting the case reopened? The cover-up?

7.Kirsten, friendship, love, the initial sexual awkwardness, his own behaviour? The final aggression towards her? The bed-wetting and tension, doing the laundry in the night, Benni and the sport, helping, harsh, ridiculing Benni?

8.Benni, his age, the half-brother, his father, their common mother? Soccer, the criticism of his father, awkward? His being bullied, bashed, on the bridge? David and his talking with Benni, the change? The story of the frogs? Benni’s pet rabbit, loving it, its eventually dying, David urging him to bash the rabbit with the rock? Benni and his wanting to cross the bridge, his fear? David and his kindness, the training for the soccer? The aggressive moves? The game of being hooded and running into the trees, Benni doing it with the boy and guiding him into the tree, the boy in the forest, going to hospital? Benni’s dependence on David, the gift of the rabbit, going to the woods to collect the sticks, David and his giving him the hidden gun, taunting Benni, Benni fainting? David at the game, his berserk comments even after the players had left the field? Benni and his telling the truth to David and David agreeing to go with the therapist?

9.David and Kirsten, moving out, his suspicions of Felix, his job, going to the boy in the forest, being fired? At the party, the slides, the horrors of Afghanistan? His mother ignorant about Afghanistan? The card game and his telling the truth, the men and their reaction?

10.David’s aggression, especially towards his stepfather, his criticism of his mother, Benni and his choices?

11.The therapist, his unwillingness to go to her, comments on her breath, the attack? Her giving the card to Kirsten? Kirsten calling the police and the therapist?

12.The film not showing David’s time away but his return?

13.The tone of the second return, Kirsten more measured, Benni coming to see David? Grounds for hope?

LE RING

Canada, 2007, 90 minutes, Colour.
Maxim Desjardines Tremblay.
Directed by Anais Barbeau Lavalette.

At the centre of this drama, set in some of the poorer, run-down neighbourhoods of Montreal, is a 12 year old boy, Jessy, played believably and engagingly by Maxime Desjardins Tremblay. One reason is that he is so convincing is that he is a non-professional who lives in the area and knows the kind of life that is portrayed on screen.

Director Anais Barbeau Lavallette has made a number of documentaries and brings this sensibility to her story of a sadly dysfunctional family. While the focus is on the children, we see an ineffectual father who has no joy out of life and a depressed mother who leaves home to work as a prostitute. The older boy, Sam, is pressurised by his peers to work as a drug courier and spends time in jail for stealing a car. Kelly, just older than Jessy, is quite strong-minded as she enters puberty. There is also a young baby.

Jessy is bored at school and is a truant, going to see his wrestler friend, Killer, and to play with his old dog, Clomp. It is the wrestling world that makes Jessy come alive – the film opens vividly with his eager arrival at the ring, his shouting his lungs out with the vigorous crowd, cheering the local hero Firestorm and booing the loser, Killer. If he could plan his life, Jessy would become a wrestler. He does get a chance to do a little training. He is also astute enough to live through a possible disillusionment when he learns that all the bouts are fixed.

Jessy is underpriviliged in terms of family, home, possessions, education, even healthy food. But, he has something of decency and principles which are tested when he goes to see his mother, when he visits his brother in prison and refuses to deliver drugs, when he questions Killer why he always accepts defeat in the ring and decides that a person does not have to lie down just because the crowd expects it and wants it. It is a squalid world that Jessy lives in – but there is hope in the film that he can move beyond it.

1.The impact of the drama? The documentary background and style? Realism?

2.Montreal, the poorer suburbs, the dinginess, the squalid apartments? The wrestling centre? The streets, the surrounding wasteland, the bridge, the river? School? The musical score?

3.The credits and the wrestling: Jessy and his entering, his age, his love for wrestling, the fighters, the artificiality, the boss, the referee, the details of the bouts, staged? The audience reaction, winners and losers?

4.Jessy and his place in the family, Sam as the older brother, his being mixed up in gangs and drugs? Going to the wrestling with his brother? The challenge by the dealer? At home, the bonds in the family? With Sam, Sam taking the car, letting Jessy drive, the crash? Sam going to prison, Jessy and Kelly and their visit, inability to communicate? Sam’s return, the fried chicken meal and Jessy’s delight? The drug dealing, forcing Jessy to do deliveries? His delaying, the killing of the dog? His relationship with Kelly, her age, their clashing, the bike, Kelly’s menstruation, their sharing the room, their love for their mother, her absence? Jessy seeing his mother in the street? Kelly’s encounter? The baby, looking after the baby, the meals? A dysfunctional family?

5.Jessy, his room, Bruce Lee, opening the window and looking across the way, the person dying, listening to the music? His mother, her staying till he went to sleep? Her moroseness? Leaving? The meals with the father, his sternness, the money for the wrestling? Jessy telling his father he was hungry? The poor quality of the meals? The teacher criticising and suggesting he had a bath? His upset but having the bath? Going to school, truancy? His going to see Killer, their friendship, talk? Klop, the dog? At school, bored, the teacher, picking out verbs? Talking to the teacher about the bath? His bonds with the dog, the bond with Killer? Wanting to roll his cigarettes for six dollars? His shoplifting from the Korean? His young friend, the collecting the bottles? His wetting the bed? Drying the mattress? Going again to the wrestling, wanting to be a wrestler, discussions with the boss, being allowed to watch, his lessons in the ring? The friend revealing that everything was fixed? His continuing to watch, discussions with Killer, asking him why he was always a loser, Killer saying he enjoyed the bouts? His not delivering the drugs? Going to see his mother, the visit? His sadness at the dog’s death, the burial? The final wrestling bout, urging Killer not to be a loser, Killer standing up and upsetting the fixed match? A final moment of happiness as he rode his bike?

6.A portrait of a young boy, happiness, relative happiness, relative success, issues of conscience, stances? His future?

7.His parents, his father and the drinking, neglect, the meals? The mother and her listlessness, departure, on the street as a prostitute? Her encounters with Jessy, the shock encounter with Kelly? Her not returning?

8.Killer, in himself, his friendship, his dog, rolling the cigarettes, always being the loser, what the public wanted? His final self-assertion? Jessy’s encouragement?

9.The boss, the fixed matches, the stars, Firestorm and his always winning? The audience and their shouting, wanting the winners, condemning the losers? The boss’s discussions with Jessy about what the public wanted?

10.Life, quality of life, the lack of quality? Issues of home and parents? Siblings and peers? Possibilities in education – and loss of educational opportunities? Meals and hygiene? A young boy and his personality and development?

UN COEUR SIMPLE (A SIMPLE HEART)

France, 2008,
Sandrine Bonnaire, Marina Fois.
Directed by Marion Laine.

For those, like this reviewer, who are not as familiar with 19th century French literature, it might come as a surprise to find that the novel on which this film is based was written by Gustave Flaubert, author of that critique of middle class morality and values, Madame Bovary. A Simple Heart was written twenty years after his classic novel.

This film could be called a French heritage drama. It takes its audience and immerses it in rural France with its contradictions and contrasts: the world of the wealthy and their aristocratic pretensions and the world of the servants and farmers whose existence is taken for granted to be at the disposal of the wealthy. These strata of society are taken for granted – and somewhat reinforced by the Church. While the 19th century saw the aftermath of the French Revolution and the dechristianising of the nation as well as draconian anti-clerical legislation even into the 20th century, it was also a period of extraordinary Catholic vitality in attempts at mission in France, in the founding of so many religious orders who set out to foreign missions, the phenomenon of Lourdes, a flowering of intellectual and spiritual culture. Both of these aspects of Church life are suggested during this film. (And Felicite shows us how we might understand the goodness of St Bernadette.)

A Simple Heart is a story of goodness – one could see Felicite in the classic tradition of the 'Holy Fool'.

Sandrine Bonnaire is completely convincing as Felicite (an ironic name in itself), a peasant girl who is mentally simple. Caught up in a love which might have led to marriage, her ignorance of sexuality and sensuality lead to her being jilted. Seeking a job with a family, she spends the rest of her life as their servant. Her life with the family serves as a microcosm of France at the time.

The screenplay contrasts the personalities of the two women at its centre, Felicite and the widow, Mathilde (Marina Fois), who employs her. Mathilde is a grim young woman, closed in by her grief for her husband, distant, even harsh, with her two children. While Felicite cares for the children, especially the little daughter with delicate health, play and singing are forbidden. However, it emerges that Felicite is a good and loving young woman and brings light and life in her wake.

Much of the film shows the small details of life in the household and on the farm, with excursions to the sea. The action takes place over a period of ten years and involves the devotion of the daughter to Felicite, Felicite's discovery of a sister she thought dead and her caring for her nephew. Despite the hard work and the frequent drudgery in her life, Felicite accepts her lot and is happy. The gift of a brightly coloured parrot brings extraordinary joy to her.

The widow remains strict, is courted by a cello teacher but is too timid to accept his love. Relationships with her children are strained. However, Felicite's loyalty and goodheartedness do ultimately touch the widow.

Winner of the Ecumenical Jury award in Kiev 2008, with the citation praising the film's thoughtful adaptation of Flaubert's novel, its refined sentiment and its austere beauty. It was suggested that there is also a parallel between Felicite's holy fool and Job, that, in her lifelong sacrifices, she could be seen as Job's daughter.

1.The writing of Gustav Flaubert? Classic, French, 19th century? Perspectives on society, rural life? Morality, religion?

2.The adaptation of a classic novel to a drama, the focus on character and situations, for the screen? The feminine perspective?

3.The title, the focus, on Felicite (and the meaning of her name, happiness)?

4.The 19th century countryside, the farms and mansions, the village life, the convents and schools, the church? The fields, the sea and the beaches? The musical score? An experience of the 19th century?

5.Felicite, a portrait of goodness, of simplicity, of the heart? The idiot savant? The traditional Holy Fool?

6.The opening and Felicite running through the forest, the search, wanting Theo? Her memories and the flashback? The dance, her awkwardness? Introduction to Theo, liking him, dancing with him, the kiss, in love, the marriage proposal, the honeymoon by the sea? The sexual encounter, her sensuality, his disappointment? His leaving, sending his friend, Felicite fighting with him? His military service, the widow buying out his service, his marriage? Felicite’s continued memories of Theo, seeing him working in the garden of his mansion, mentioning him in her prayer in the church, her delirium?

7.Travelling the countryside, going to the house, asking Mathilde for the job, her whole life in this house and with this family?

8.The contrast with Mathilde, the widow, memories of her husband, her sternness, her severity with her children? Allocating the jobs, not going into the kitchen, not allowing Felicite to play with Clemence? Not allowed to sing? Her severity and supervision? Humourless? Yet her sociability at cards, with her guests, cheating, laughing? Her relationship with Frederic, his teaching Paul to play the cello, at cards, his devotion to her?

9.Paul and Clemence, Paul and his aloofness, the mother’s boy? Clemence and her age, devoted to Felicite, playing, singing, calling her Nan? Depending on Felicite, the mutual love? Felicite and her putting on the children’s clothes, Clemence and her illness, going to the sea, playing in the water, on the beach and the embrace, Mathilde’s severity? The years passing?

10.Felicite and her background, limited, focusing on the present, never bored, doing her chores, loving the children, having the one dress (but changing into black after Clemence’s death)? Her wonder in seeing the sea? The bull and her saving the family, injuring her ankle, Mathilde’s spurning of the injury, her having to carry the children up the stairs? Mathilde’s moods, returning home from the sea? Felicite and the postman, rousing on him, his jokes in the kitchen? The farmer, the work, liking Felicite, the proposal? Mathilde and her severity with the gardener? Her hitting Felicite, Felicite packing, Mathilde’s pleading for her to stay for Clemence?

11.The discovery of her sister, on the beach, assumed dead? The visit, her sister bringing Victor, their memories, Felicite feeding Victor, paying for the meals? The bond with Victor, Victor playing with Clemence, Paul sternly watching? The years passing, Victor growing up, the Sunday visits, the meals, his gift of the brooch and Felicite’s delight? Enlisting, sailing that night, Felicite’s upset? No news, the letter from Havana, Victor’s death from typhoid? Mathilde and her aloofness about Victor’s death? No comparison with not getting a letter from Clemence at school?

12.Clemence going to school, the nuns, her weeping, seeing the school as a prison? Coming home, her sullenness at meals? Singing when alone? Paul, drinking, flirtatious with Felicite? Mathilde and her alienation from her children?

13.Frederic, the cello with Paul? Mathilde taking lessons, the passion, the amorous exchange? His leaving for Rouen, and Mathilde not wanting to leave?

14.Clemence, at school, her death, the two women going to see her, Mathilde wanting Felicite to do the laying out, Felicite’s devotion?

15.The priest, the catechism class, St Francis and the birds, the bird flying to the roof of the church with the prayer, Felicite’s wish, her delight in the church? The later mass, his sermon about lust and passion, Felicite and her deafness, praying her personal prayer aloud, hurrying from the church? The death of the bird and her not wanting to go to church again?

16.The gift of the parrot, her love for the bird, the postman and his teaching the bird to swear, her seeing the bird as a treasure? Its being lost, her delight in its return? Her grief at its death, the cold? Having it stuffed? At the end at her death?

17.The farmer, his work, the proposal, Mathilde’s severity in her refusal?

18.Felicite, ageless, growing in love, humble, doing good, religious or not? Mathilde’s collapse, Felicite’s care for her? The strong embrace between the two and the mellowing of Mathilde?

19.Felicite’s collapse, her sadness, wanting to dress as the virgin and go in the procession? Mathilde and her care for her, attending her death? A simple heart and a life achievement of good?