LAKEVIEW TERRACE

US, 2008, 110 minutes, Colour.
Samuel L. Jackson, Patrick Wilson, Kerry Washington, Jay Hernandez.
Directed by Neil La Bute.

Neil La Bute is best known as a playwright who is concerned by human relationships, especially those which are exploitative and dangerous. This has been true of several of his films, especially In The Company of Men and Your Friends and Neighbours. These two films showed men behaving not only badly but cruelly. This theme is present in Lakeview Terrace, emphasis on neighbours, even though he did not write the screenplay.

Malevolence.

We speak of ill-will towards others but that sounds slight compared with malevolence. Iago's constant and gnawing jealousy and hatred of Othello was malevolence, a deep-seated animosity that led to malicious behaviour. What is such malevolence like in suburbia? This is one of the key questions in Lakeview Terrace, an urban psychodrama (where some would put an emphasis on the psycho).

We are quickly introduced to Abel Turner, played with his customary commitment by Samuel L. Jackson. He is a single father, with two children, and a house that he controls with regulations, manners and good grammar. We then learn he is an LA police officer.

His curiosity is roused as he waters his garden and watches a young couple moving into the house next door. Chris (Patrick Wilson) is white. Lisa (Kerry Washington) is black. His immediate facial expressions indicate that Abel does not approve. As the days go on, not only does he disapprove, he starts to relish criticising them and disturbing them. He forbids his daughter to go to their pool. He humiliates Chris, smilingly, at a welcoming party. He is full of insinuations.

Needless to say, this puts pressure on Chris and Lisa as well as on their marriage as they struggle with fixing the house, then job issues and, finally, pregnancy. Chris tries macho confrontation with Abel but he is not good at it and Abel is able to turn the tables and humiliate Chris with a DVD of sexual provocation of Chris at a police stag party Abel has hosted.

In the meantime we find out more and more about Abel and his mode of police work that leads to official inquiries.

Constantly in the background, on television news and in the scenes of smoke and haze, are the frequent LA fires that threaten the hills and the houses in the outer suburbs. Their proximity provides an image for the final confrontation and the culmination of Abel's malevolence.

The fact that Abel shows animosity towards a couple in a mixed race relationship highlights the nature of prejudice that leads to violent bigotry using righteousness as an excuse.

The usual name given to this kind of psychological thriller is a story of 'the neighbour from hell'. Hell is malevolence.

1.Psychological thriller? Racist drama? Violent drama? Police? Combination of these genres?

2.The LA settings, the suburbs, homes and the environment, affluent, the valley and crime scenes? The bars? Atmosphere of reality? The score and the moods?

3.The Los Angeles fires, their threat, the menace, the television reportage, the clouds of smoke, getting closer to the homes, the climax?

4.A sense of menace, the threats, malevolence, exercise of malice, bigotry and anger?

5.Abel waking up, his kids, the discipline, the rules, changing the shirt, the antagonism of the children, the daughter and her iPod? At home, the picture of his wife? Hosing the garden, observing the neighbours? His work in the police? Relationships with his partner? The episode with the informer, the criminals running, his getting information, giving him the okay for drugs? Using him? The episode with the gunman threatening his wife, the chase, his violent treatment, trying to teach him a lesson? His answers to the internal affairs inquiry? The reaction of the men, inviting them over for his noisy party? His sanity, the story about his wife, his suspicions? His motivation for antagonism towards Chris and Lisa? His marriage, his attitude towards sexuality, his children, mixed-race unions?

6.The move, Chris and Lisa, Lisa’s father and his wealth, his attitudes, excluding Chris from conversations, his inquiries about children? His visits and his living at a distance from them?

7.The move, having their own home, settling in, Abel’s lights, the pool and the sexual encounter, the children watching? The rebuke note on the car? Abel and his rules? Chris and Lisa as characters, their love, the tensions in the marriage, his working with the grocery chain, her work at home? The racial issues, his feeling he was on the front line, defending himself? His interactions with Abel, trying to be macho? His reaction to Lisa’s news of the pregnancy?

8.Abel, the lights, security? The hints of his disapproval, his tour of the streets with Chris after his run, the party and his denouncing the cigarettes in front of Lisa? His children, the daughter going for a swim, listening to Lisa, his rebuke of her? The security lights? The policeman’s stag party, the DVD and his delivering it to Lisa? In the bar, telling his story to Chris?

9.Lisa, her love for Chris, the mixed marriage, her attitudes towards Abel, the party, Celia and her swimming, the issue of permissions? Her pregnancy, the dispute with Chris? Her father? Going home from the party, the attack, going to hospital?

10.Abel’s children, going to stay with his sister-in-law? Her puzzle about his behaviour?

11.The police, Abel’s partner, his happy marriage, doing the test? The background of corruption in the LA police force?

12.The final party, the thug going into the house, destroying the goods, Abel and his phone call, the alarm, Abel pursuing the thug and shooting him? His being seen as the hero? His search for his phone? The fires, hosing his house, Chris and Lisa coming back, the discovery of the phone, Lisa driving away and the crash, the confrontation with the guns, the shooting?

13.The use of genre styles by playwright Neil LaBute? to explore themes of racism, malevolence, tension?

 

 

 

THE CHILDREN

 

UK, 2008, 84 minutes, Colour.
Eva Birthistle, Stephen Campbell Moore, Rachel Shelley, Hannah Tointon, Jeremy Sheffield.
Directed by Tom Shankland.

 

There have been a number of films where children have been malevolent – think of the film versions of Henry James' The Turn of the Screw (like The Innocents) and of John Wyndham's The Midwich Cuckoos (Village of the Damned, Children of the Damned). This is one of those films though not nearly in the same league. Taking a cue from the general plot of The Invasion of the Body Snatchers where a strange presence (this time chemical, it seems) takes over the personalities of the snatched, the children turn on the adults.

 

Formerly called The Day, The Children is about a wintry day at Christmastime where Elaine and Jonah (Eva Birthistle and Stephen Campbell Moore) take their two children plus unhappy teenager, Casey (Hannah Tointon) from Elaine's previous marriage, to spend a carefree holiday with Chloe (Elaine's sister) and Robbie and their two children. The four children are very young.

 

After what seems like interminable jollity, the audience is ready for some more serious goings on and (unworthy thought) that Robbie, who seems too cheery to be true, be the first to go. He is.

 

What follows is a lot of daylight mayhem and some puzzle as to what is driving the children to such malice.

 

Actually, one does not wonder all that much because the acting is not particularly persuasive, especially that of the children, so one observes the terror rather than identifying with it, despite the efforts of Eva Birthistle to give the proceedings more oomph.

 

The idea behind the film is effective. It is just that the children themselves are not.

 

1.A different horror movie? Atmosphere? Mysterious virus? Killings?

 

2.The Christmas setting, the families, Elaine and her husband, their arriving with their children? Greeted by Robbie and Chloe? Their children? The house, the grounds, the atmosphere? The exuberance? The surrounding woods? The snow, the ice, the trees? The sinister surroundings? The musical score?

 

3.The title, the focus on the children? (The previous title, The Day?)

 

4.Elaine, Jonah, their relationship, Casey and her relationship with her mother, her wanting to go to the party, her adolescent attitude? Jonah and his love for Paulie and Miranda? His doting on Miranda? Elaine and her concern about Paulie? Characters? Relationships? Preparation for the horror experience to come?

 

5.Casey, her background, Jonah being her stepfather? Her resentments, her not wanting to be called Mouse? Her going for the celebration, looking after the children? The screenplay suggesting there was something sinister about her? In fact, her care for her mother? Disdain for Jonah? Looking after the children, Robbie and his flirtation, the tattoo? The phone calls, her absence during Robbie’s death? Her growing concern, with her mother in the house, locked in? The escape? Her finally being taken over – the close-up in the car at the end?

 

6.Elaine, concerned for Paulie? Miranda and her disdain? Paulie and his hitting Jonah? Jonah and his teaching his daughter Chinese? His pretensions? The day, discussions, the meal? His concern, suspicions of Casey? Wanting to save Miranda? Going off in the car – and the audience then seeing the crash? His death? Elaine, strong, her concern, the discussions with Chloe? The attack by the children, Casey rescuing her? The final confrontation and Casey saving her mother’s life?

 

7.Robbie and Chloe, their children, their ideas about home education? Cheerful? The criticisms of Elaine? The day, Jeremy and Casey, the tattoo? Jeremy with the children, the sled and his death? Chloe, the confrontation with the children, searching in the woods? Her eye?

 

8.The children, Paulie and his being sick? Nicky and Leah, Leah seeming sinister? Her parents doting on her? Miranda, her seeming to be able to control events, deaths? At the table, in their rooms, playing?

 

9.How well did the film give an explanation? Something wrong with the blood? The cells in close-up? The genes, murderous?

 

10.How effective a horror film? Audiences identifying with the parents and this deadly experience of children?

 

 

 

 

 

FLAWLESS

UK, 2007, 108 minutes, Colour.
Demi Moore, Michael Caine, Lambert Wilson, Nathaniel Parker, Joss Ackland, Derren Nesbitt.
Directed by Michael Radford.

The opening credits show us hands sifting for precious stones in the South African mud pools and then the cutting and polishing the gems until they shine as brilliant diamonds. Flawless is a film about diamonds. But, it is also a thriller about a very cleverly thought out robbery from the vault of London Diamonds, a multinational that has a hold on all international sales. The setting is 1960, the period of apartheid and ambiguous British attitudes towards workers in South Africa.

There are political implications in the robbery but also personal motivations.

The film opens, however, in 2000 and makes a suggestion that audiences are meant to interpret one way while the screenwriter means another – which gives the film an irony as we watch it and then another angle as the film comes to an end.

Demi Moore is an ambitious executive in London Diamonds but is continually passed over for promotion by the irascible boss, played by Joss Ackland. Michael Caine is one of the janitors and cleaners that no one notices but who hears everything. He concocts a plan to enter the vault and – well, you will just have to see the film to find out what he does...!

This is a polished thriller from Michael Radford (Il Postino, Merchant of Venice) with Demi Moore giving one of her now relatively infrequent performances. Michael Caine has been constantly on screen in leading roles for more than forty years and still commands attention. He is quite believable as Hobbs, the ingenious but unnoticed cleaner (Caine notes that his mother was a cleaner at the British Houses of Parliament). Lambert Wilson is the insurance investigator who has to find the diamonds and unmask the thieves.

Flawless can be seen as either old-fashioned or classical film-making – which means that it tells an interesting story, has classy performances and entertains.

1.The title, expectations? Diamonds, the credits sequence and the finding of diamonds, treating them, the ring? The robbery and its being flawless?

2.An entertainment, the moral perspective, the thieves, their attitudes, motivations? Vengeance, ambition? The ending and the giving away of a hundred million pounds?

3.London 2000, the café, Laura, her age, the information, the manuscript of her book, the interview for the paper, the discussion about prison, the interviewer and her being intrigued?

4.London 1960, the city, the diamond building, the foyer, the offices, the vault? Apartments, bars? The cleaning area? Authentic, affluent? The musical score?

5.The corporation, Ashtoncroft, corporation head, his son, expectations? The executives? Sinclair and his connection with London Diamonds? The structure of the office, the meetings, promotions, women and role, being passed over?

6.Laura, in the United Kingdom, her Oxford education, American background, her mother and fostering her ambitions? Fifteen years with the firm, her accent, style, dress? Signing in and her friendliness? Hobbs and her knowing him?

7.Hobbs and his work, being looked over, talking to people, his family background, his wife and her death from cancer, his grief, his own family, training as a plumber, his father? Indications of what was to come, the robbery, motivations and technique?

8.Hobbs talking to Laura, knowing the information about her career, proposing that she steal the codes? His need for her? Her hesitation? Persuasive? The scene at the dinner, her going into Ashtoncroft’s room, searching, her gloves, fingerprints, getting the code? The later issue of fingerprints, the discussions with Finch?

9.The plan, the meetings, her anxiety? The introduction of the security cameras? Laura and the theory of sixty seconds blind time?

10.The executives, their reaction, the behaviour, the money, the issues of exploitation of Africa?

11.Hobbs, his timing, cleaning, the wagon, going into the vault – and the actual robbery not being revealed until the end?

12.Laura, her nightmare, her smuggling out the diamonds and being caught? Her watching Hobbs the next morning, Hobbs coming out the exit, returning, cleaning the toilet? The single diamond, its being given back by the lawyer, Laura finding it later?

13.The empty vault, the amazement of the executives? Hobbs, his talk, the motivations, the insurance issues, Sinclair as the target? Revenge? The lawyer coming to make the speeches, the return of the jewel, the deadline for the ransom?

14.Laura, the plumbing, finding the heap of diamonds? Hobbs and the gun, the explanations?

15.Ashtoncroft, his anger, his collapse and death? Sinclair, calling the press, the press coming, Ashtoncroft’s death? The crisis for Sinclair, his shooting himself?

16.Finch, his personality, the insurance work, the investigation, Laura assisting him, his discussions with her, with the other members of the staff? The final talk with her, his knowing what happened?

17.Forty years passing, the revelation of Laura’s happiness, marriage? Her giving away the hundred million?

 

 

 

THE GIRL IN THE PARK

 

US, 2007, 118 minutes, Colour.
Sigourney Weaver, Kate Bosworth, Alessandro Nivola, Keri Russell, Joanna Gleeson, David Rasche.
Directed by David Auburn.

 

There is a rather unprepossessing title, even prosaic, for what is a much better film than we might be led to believe. It has been written and directed by playwright, David Auburn (Proof, which was filmed with Gwynneth Paltrow and Anthony Hopkins, and the screenplay for the romantic time travel story, The Lake House).

 

There has been a mini-proliferation of films about child abductions in the last year. Ben Affleck directed a film version of Denis Lehane's Gone Baby Gone to considerable effect. Angelina Jolie was impressive as a mother whose child disappeared in Clint Eastwood's Changeling. The very dark side and consequences of a child disappearing and subject to sexual abuse featured sombrely in Damian Harris's Gardens of the Night. All three films were well worth seeing.

 

This time the focus is on the effect of the abduction on the family, especially the mother who blames herself for the loss of her daughter and cannot forgive herself and who cannot really move on in her life. The film is a star vehicle for Sigourney Weaver as the mother, Julia. In the opening sequences, she shows she is a sweet and loving mother. However, 16 years are passed over after the disappearance of her child. She is separated from her husband (David Rasche), alienated from her son (Alessandro Nivola), embittered by life and fate. She returns to New York for her bank job and her boss (Elias Koteas) at the time of her prosperous builder son's engagement. His fiancee (Keri Russell) takes great pains to bring her fiance and his mother together.

 

The film is tough going emotionally for the audience. While there is great sympathy for the bereft mother, there is always the hope that she can make more of a life for herself and the feelings of frustration when she doesn't.

 

The core of the drama is a young woman, Louise, whom Julia impulsively helps when Louise is shoplifting a pair of sunglasses. They meet again and Julia gives her money to help her home. But, that is a facade and Julia is angry at their next chance encounter. However, Louise who has serious drugs and sex relationships is roughly the age her daughter would be and she takes her in. We guess what the consequences will be but also want to see whether Julia will be changed or not, whether she will be reconciled to her son, and how the young woman will react. Kate Bosworth gives a strong performance as Louise.

 

Serious themes and good performances.

 

1.The impact of the drama, the personal drama, family drama? A drama of child abduction and grief?

 

2.New York in the 1980s, family life, school, the park – happiness?

 

3.The 21st century, the broken family, sadness, work, apartments, the restaurants? A harder world?

 

4.The title, in general, Julia’s daughter, the children in the park, Louise?

 

5.The 1980s and Julia, her loving children, storytelling to her daughter, her tenderness, Doug and the family life? Chris going to school? Her singing in the club, the offer of the recording? Her daughter asking her questions? Going to the park, playing, the sudden disappearance, the search, frantic, asking people?

 

6.Sixteen years later, Julia, her return to New York, her age, bitterness, consumed by grief, mentally disturbed? The divorce, distant from Chris, not going to his graduation? Alone, the apartment, her hard work at the bank, the boss and his concern, a serious world?

 

7.The engagement party, Chris and Celeste, Celeste’s parents, the speeches, Doug and his new wife? Chris and the sense of separation from his mother? Julia, working, arriving late, leaving, Chris pursuing her?

 

8.Julia and Doug, the seven years after the abduction, hard for Doug, the divorce and his remarriage, Chris and his being part of his father’s family?

 

9.Julia and Louise, the incident with the sunglasses, Julia acting on an impulse, lying about Louise stealing them? The later encounter? Louise and her story, the gift of the money, her expression of gratitude? The encounter in the restaurant, Louise with the men, drinking, the scene and the attack on Julia?

 

10.Celeste and Chris, arranging the meal, Julia actually coming, the tension, the discussions, the scene?

 

11.Chris’s work, a good man, his clients, his partner, Celeste and her pregnancy?

 

12.Louise following Julia, Julia’s anger, Louise staying, the shower, settling in, their discussions? The true story, her brother coming, Julia’s anger? His being involved in Scrabble competitions? Her going to the bus station, hearing the name? The story of the adoption?

 

13.Louise as a character, young, sexual clients, bringing them home (Julia and her reaction – and her beginning a liaison with the boss)? The meals, going to the party with Celeste’s parents, the various reactions?

 

14.Chris, his reaction to Louise, trying to tell Julia the truth about her daughter, her death?

 

15.Julia and Louise, each changing the other, Julia becoming more open, sharing?

 

16.Chris, his visits, wondering about the relationship, his questions, angers?

 

17.Chris and his accident, in hospital? Celeste and the birth of the baby? Julia finally visiting Chris, overcoming her difficulties? The ending – the family, the creation of bonds, some hope?

IL POSTINO

Italy, 1994, 113 minutes, Colour.
Massimo Troisi, Philippe Noiret.
Directed by Michael Radford.

Il Postino is a very agreeable film, a film about older men, sharing experiences, creativity and friendship.

The film is set in the 1950s on an island off the Italian coast. Celebrated Chilean poet, who had leftist sympathies is living in exile from his native Chile. On the island, the postman who delivers his letters is ambitious for something different from being a fisherman like his father and the other people in the village. He begins discussions with Neruda, Neruda takes more notice, they discuss metaphors, poetry, the postman himself rather ingenuously wanting to be a poet but thinking he is not. However, he does create metaphors and wins the heart and hand of a young woman who works at the local café – despite her vociferously opposing mother.

The film also has a background of Italian politics in the 1950s, the rise of the Christian Democrats, the opposition of the Communist Party – and the protests, police violence at protests, deaths. The film has a sad ending with the news of the death of the postman and Neruda discovering it several years later. Massimo Troisi is the postman, an embodiment of an Italian peasant who is creative, warm in friendship. Troisi died just after the making of the film. French actor Philippe Noiret is very good as Neruda.

Another film on this theme was the Chilean film, With a Burning Patience.

The film was directed by British director Michael Radford who has made only a few films. They include his expose of life amongst the wealthy British in Kenya, White Mischief, his version of The Merchant of Venice with Al Pacino and Jeremy Irons and the heist thriller, Flawless, with Demi Moore and Michael Caine.

1.A film of friendship, poetry, the imagination?

2.Pablo Neruda, his character and reputation, Chilean, as a poet, Nobel Prize winner, sentenced to exile, living in Italy? His household, secretary? His work in exile, contemplation, the beaches, his personal style, friendship, sharing? Portrait of the poet?

3.Italy, the locations, the island, the village, life in the 1950s? The citizens and their hopes, reliance on fishing, the hopes for politicians and new building? Politics, communism, Christian Democrats? The elections, the promises, failure?

4.Italian protests of the 50s, demonstrations, riots, the police, brutality, deaths?

5.The portrait of the postman: his age, living with his father, the expectations that he become a fisherman, his wanting something else in life, the letters from the relatives in the United States? The job for the postman, delivering letters solely to Neruda? His friendship with the postmaster and their discussions? Going to Neruda, delivering the mail, his curiosity, his awkwardness, helping Neruda out with practical details? Neruda and his offhand manner? Neruda gradually taking notice of him? Their discussions, the research, poems, the postman and his reading the books, asking Neruda about metaphors, their sharing? The joy of metaphors, the example, his trying them out himself?

6.Neruda, his poetry, metaphors, creation, the sea, the beach, the walks?

7.The young girl, her work in the café, the postman meeting her, the infatuation, falling in love, discussing it with Neruda, metaphors, his writing poetry for her? Her mother, her being upset, the suggestive nature of the metaphors? Her finally capitulating?

8.The postman, the change, his love, marriage, his poems?

9.Neruda and his leaving, the years passing, the citizens seeing him in newsreels? His being busy, international travel, seen in Paris? The island people and their reactions, thinking he had neglected them? In gratitude?

10.His visit, seeking out the girl, meeting her son? Hearing the story, the postman and his poem, going to the demonstration, the speeches, his invitation to recite, the riot, the police, his being bashed, his death?

11.A film about a more meaningful life, possibilities, shared experiences and views, creativity, friendship?

ZACK AND MIRI MAKE A PORNO

US, 2008, 109 minutes, Colour.
Seth Rogen, Elizabeth Banks.
Directed by Kevin Smith.

The title is truthful. It offended a number of groups in the US – which rightly raised the question of what is more pornographic, sexuality or violence – and a number of cinemas refused to show the film. The cast pointed out that there is nothing in Zach and Miri that has not been seen in many other films, some with a lower classification. They did not point out the language, which is also a strong issue for many audiences. It has been written and directed by Kevin Smith, a Catholic, who used to revel in being an 'enfant terrible' of the cinema with Clerks and Dogma and now might be called a 'middle-aged terrible', in the sense that he enjoys being more than a little provocative.

Years ago, I was warned by a priest that I respected greatly not to make an immediate assumption about the suitability or not of a film about sex (and this was in the context of Doris Day and Rock Hudson in Pillow Talk). He said that every human topic could be the subject of humour, otherwise we put it on a pedestal and it is idolised (or demonised). So, Zach and Miri is a legitimate subject for a movie. Some sensibilities (which are pre-moral) may not be interested in the film or its subject at all. But, then come the sensitivities and moral discussions: how is the subject presented?

Prudery and permissiveness are in constant debate with each other. For many it is a generational thing. In the past, many of us were reticent in matters of sexuality, seeing it as a matter of propriety. The main difficulty with this, as we have discovered to our great cost, is that this meant that many people were furtive in their curiosity about sexuality and in pursuing that curiosity. The revelations about sexual misconduct and sexual abuse in the churches have scandalised many but have made us realise that a kind of rigid propriety is not enough to control curiosity and urges. The last forty years have seen a broader presentation of sexuality, nudity and more open and detailed discussion in films and television. Which means that many middle-aged and younger people are more open, more explicit about these topics and issues (even in humour). It does not occur to them that their treatment of the topics is objectionable to others. This may be crass. It may also be more honestly earthy.

This leads to discussions about community standards and acceptability – which, of course, means that sensitivities will differ considerably from one culture to another.

Kevin Smith, since Clerks, has had no trouble in his characters talking about all aspects of sexuality and using language that Professor Higgins once said 'would make a sailor blush'. As an 'enfant terrible in middle age', he wants to push beyond some limits. But, as a commercial film-maker who has invested a lot of money in his project, he does not want it banned. He wants it to be seen, and paid for. What he has done in Zach and Miri is to use what is euphemistically called, by consumer advisers and censors, 'strong language', which means that there is constant swearing (which is taken for granted rather than intentionally offensive), explicit references to body functions, bodily functions and the range of behaviour which comes under the heading 'sexual'.

Depending on our sense of humour and our tolerance, some of this, despite ourselves, will probably be funny whether we think it should be or not. It is the toppling of sexuality from its too exalted pedestal.

It is a pity that pornography seems to be taken for granted by so many as a sex resource that most people use, whether it be the internet, magazines or movies. We still need some moral standards regarding sexuality that respect persons and highlight exploitation. While Kevin Smith's characters take pornography as a given in today's (western) societies, Smith is something of a moraliser (perhaps despite appearances). The context of Zach and Miri is a platonic relationship of a couple who are not sexually inhibited in their behaviour (until the challenge of making the porno comes up) but who have a deeper sense of love and respect. They discover this more really for themselves (and it is obvious to their colleagues) and move towards a truer loving commitment. This is something of the 'Judd Apatow Syndrome'. In his comedies (Knocked Up, 40 Year Old Virgin, Zohan, Pineapple Express...), Apatow has a first part which shows us the crass and, then, the resolution always shows us deeper love and commitment. With Apatow's writer-star, Seth Rogen, as Zach, the connection is valid.

Zach and Miri go through the experience of making the porno and discover themselves and love.

Of course, what Kevin Smith is doing is poking fun at porno films, their crassness and the audience response. He employs two stars of 'adult' (another odd euphemism), Traci Lords and Katie Morgan as well as his Jay character, the uninhibited Jason Mewes. But, then he shows the awkwardness, the silly things that happen (and some disgusting ones) and the inherent inanity of pornography. He also introduces a gay porn actor (a very funny performance from Justin Long) who talks with great seriousness about himself and his work as well as his relationship with the High School hero (Brendan Routh).

Elizabeth Banks as Miri and Craig Robinson as their friend and colleague give the film some 'gravitas' even amid the capers. Seth Rogen can do humour, slob and unusual romantic hero with earnest and deadpan humour.

So, Kevin Smith is a man of his times in language and outlook on sexuality and offers humour accordingly. Some of it is inevitably hit and miss, some of it is funny and much of it is crass. But, it is only a movie, a spoof that should not be taken literally, even the tongue-in-cheek sequence after the credits – except in what Smith values most: a truly loving commitment.

1.The title, audience expectations? Provocative? American reactions, difficulties with the censor, cinemas banning the film? The advertising?

2.The film as a challenge about attitudes towards sexuality, violence, censorship? Protest? Values and comparisons between sex and violence and priorities?

3.Kevin Smith, his ability to provoke, his cheeky attitude towards life, earthy jokes, comic strip style, spoofs? The audiovisual culture, YouTube?, films, pornography? Their styles?

4.The humour and taste, jokes about sexuality, not putting it on a pedestal, keeping it in proportion?

5.21st century society and the place of pornography, permissiveness? YouTube? Availability of DVDs? People buying them, making them? The easy access? The amoral stance on pornography?

6.The disgusting aspects of the film, behaviour, language and action?

7.Sentiment: from permissiveness, to reflecting contemporary attitudes, taking relationships deeper, discovery of love, commitment?

8.Zack and Miri, their friendship from schooldays, platonic? Their own personal relationships and sexuality? Together, friends, sharing ideas, work, money? Losing their money, the facilities being turned off? Burning the bills to keep warm? The comedy of discomfort?

9.Seth Rogen as Zack, his appearance, deadpan style, delivery, humour? Irony? Work, his friends, talk, humour?

10.The contrast with Miri, her life, work, her having more energy?

11.The high school reunion, whether to go or not, the dress and Miri preparing, Zack not wanting to go? The different attitudes, going, meeting the hostess at the door, memories of school, jokes, comparisons? Miri and her idol, wanting to flirt with him, not realising he was gay?

12.The comedy with the gay actor, his talk, performance, his relationship with the boyfriend, his porn industry work? The effect? Coming out with his friend?

13.The discussion about what to do about money, the joke about the pornography film? The decision? Going to get the photographer, hiring him? Zack and his friend at the diner, persuading him to be the producer, his character, worried about his wife?

14.The actors, the women with their actual porn film background? Their talk, behaviour, disgusting behaviour?

15.The sets, the clothes, the preparations? The auditions and the variety of types, the comic touches? The two male actors, their auditions, being hired? Jason Mewes and his being in Kevin Smith films, Jay, his performance, deadpan humour? Their behaviour?

16.The acting, the details, the production and direction, Zack and his role, his friend feeling awkward? The sending up of pornography, actors, audiences and behaviour?

17.The set being demolished, the upset? Going to the diner, the previous fights with the owner? The photographer working in the diner?

18.The issue of Zack and Miri, sex, their discussions, the agreement, the behaviour, the filming, the effect on each of them, discovering their love for each other? The others easily able to see this, their comments?

19.Miri, her reaction to Zack, his seeming permissiveness, her being hurt? Zack’s agreement – thinking that Miri was in favour?

20.What happened in fact, what didn’t happen? The actor moving in – and Zack misunderstanding? The truth? Miri and her love for Zack, Zack and his not going with the actress? The finale?

21.The post-credits sequence – tongue-in-cheek, the commercial for the pornography, the discussions about it, the role of pornography and relationships and marriage? The cumulative effect of the jokes, how funny? The title in retrospect?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

BABE

 

Australia, 1995, 93 minutes, Colour.
James Cromwell, Magda Szubanski. Voices of: Miriam Margolyes, Danny Mann, Hugo Weaving, Miriam Flynn, Evelyn Krape, Paul Livingston, Roscoe Lee Brown.
Directed by Chris Noonan.

 

Babe can be recommended for all but the most committed slam-bang action fans. As a matter of fact, Babe has also been very successful at the American box-office and a 1995 award winner.

 

I thought I would have to suspend disbelief when I heard that the film was about a pig that wanted to be a sheep-dog. But, from the very start, with the story-book credits, I found I had no difficulty in sympathising with Babe and enjoying the happenings and adventures at the Hoggett farm. James Cameron is solid as the farmer who cares for Babe and discovers that his piglet, befriended and mothered by the sympathetic sheep-dog, Fly. Magda Szubanski provides some laughs as the farmer's wife.

 

But it is the animals (and the fine voices giving them character) that make the film. While the story line is predictable, it has great charm and draws us in. (I also liked the three mice from the Jim Henson studios who read each chapter title and chortle `Blue Moon' and arias from Carmen).

 

The variety of accents and the somewhat British landscapes (filmed in the NSW southern highlands) seem to indicate that it takes place in an amalgam of English-speaking countries. A delight for all ages.

 

1.The worldwide popularity of Babe? The appeal, the story, characters? The sympathetic pig? A story of overcoming the odds?

 

2.A British story, Australian production?

 

3.The live action, the actors, the animals, the animation, the special effects?

 

4.The voices: Babe, the other animals, Rex, Maa, Fly? The duck? The horse? The villainous animals? The animals as ‘human’/humane?

 

5.The music, drawing on French 19th century classics? Saint- Saens – and the words for the song?

 

6.The chorus of the mice, their songs, their comments, chatter? Complementing the role of the narrator? The narrator’s voice, tone, telling the story?

 

7.The locations, the farm, the countryside, the sheep show?

 

8.The pigs, the farming, the fate of the pigs? Babe surviving? Being taken in with the other animals? Adopted by Fly, brought up with the puppies? Rex and his comments, his statements about the order of things? Babe and Maa, the elderly sheep? Friends with Ferdinand, the duck? Farmer Hoggett and his liking Babe? Mrs Hoggett and her plans for Christmas dinner?

 

9.The pups being sold? Fly taking on Babe? Christmas, Farmer Hoggett and his not killing Babe? The dinner with duck – and Ferdinand’s comments, disappearance? Babe and the sheep rustlers, Babe and the alarm? The impact for Farmer Hoggett? Babe as wise, joining the sheep-herding work? Rex and his comments, criticising? Babe and imitating the dogs, trying to frighten the sheep? But asking them politely? The sheep and their pleasant response?

 

10.Rex, his disapproval, his attacking Fly, her being wounded? His even attacking Farmer Hoggett, biting him? Rex and his being sedated? The situation with the sheep?

 

11.The wild dog attack? Babe and his courage, the sadness with Maa being killed? Farmer Hoggett thinking Babe was responsible? The threat to Babe, going to shoot him, the discovery of the truth?

 

12.Farmer Hoggett as a character, the contrast with his wife, his liking of Babe, taking Babe into the house, singing? The training for the trials?

 

13.The show, the judges and their criticism, the crowds? The sheep and their not corresponding with the pig? Rex and his change of heart, discussions with the sheep, the secret password? Rex giving the word to Babe?

 

14.The trials, Babe as the sheep-pig, the sheep and their collaboration? His achievement? One hundred percent?

 

15.The film inviting adults and children into a fantasy world, delight – but so well made as to appeal to both adults and children?

 

THE CHOKING MAN

US, 2006, 84 minutes, Colour.
Mandy Patinkin, Eugena Yuan.
Directed by Steve Barron.

This is one of those brief, affecting low-budget independent films that invites the audience into a small, sometimes overlooked world and spend some time with characters that we might generally not meet or only notice in passing.

We are in a diner in Jamaica, Queens, New York, not exactly the centre of the universe, but, as the Greek American proprietor of the diner (Mandy Patinkin) says, there are 140 languages spoken there. We are going to meet the staff.

Jorge (Octavio Gomez) is a quiet young man from Ecuador who spends most of his waking life washing dishes and mopping the floor. He travels by subway to his apartment where he lives alone – well, not exactly alone, we see a white man there who spends a lot of time telling Jorge what to do. It is his stronger alter ego who often speaks a lot of good sense to the painfully shy and taciturn Jorge.

Among the staff at the shop is Jerry, a young ex-con from Philadelphia, who enjoys teasing Jorge. A middle-aged woman who is disappointed by the treatment she receives from her family is the stalwart of the staff, strong and kindly.

Then a new member of staff arrives, Amy (Eugenia Yuan), a sweet Chinese young woman who is niceness personified – to everyone, but especially to Jorge whose 'roommate' urges him to befriend her and give her a present.

Nothing much happens on the surface. The proprietor and his gorgon wife go to Florida for Thanksgiving. Jorge is caught up in his inner life. Amy continues to be nice to people. Jerry comes back and harasses Jorge some more.

The main drama comes from a regular customer choking on a fishbone and unable to dislodge it. Eventually, Jorge reluctantly comes to the rescue, putting into practice the moves, the Heimlich Maneuver, shown on a poster that he always works under.

Steve Barron has a strong reputation as a director of music videos. His small repertoire of films includes Electric Dreams, The Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles and Mike Bassett, England Manager (with Ricky Tomlinson).

A pleasing small sketch of a movie that also uses animation sequences to illustrate Jorge's inner life and conflicts.

1.A slice of life? Brief, modest? The small focus?

2.The director, his film career, music videos? His decision to write and direct a small story?

3.The title, the poster, health, its place in the kitchen, the explanation of the procedure – Jorge and his working under it? The actual experience of a choking man?

4.Jamaica, Queens? A small world, the diner, one hundred and forty languages spoken, the subway overpass, the streets, stations, bridges, apartments? Authentic? The musical score?

5.The owner, Greek background, the Olympic Café, his silent wife? The menus? The staff, the chef, the waiters, the middle-aged woman and her being the den mother? Jorge and his washing and mopping? A microcosm?

6.Jorge, the background from Ecuador, the migrant, his age, shy, lonely, not talking much, Jerry teasing him and its hurting him? His travel home, alone, watching the television, eating his sandwich?

7.The roommate? Real or imagined? An alter-ego? White, male, his age, his frequent comments, the critique, commenting on the sandwich, on the television? The sex question? His comments about Amy, his urging Jorge to buy a present and give it to her?

8.Amy, coming for the interview, her charm, getting the job, the Chinese background, getting money for her family? At work, with the customers? The owner, the other members of the staff? Her chatting with people? Jerry flirting with her? Jorge finding her very kind?

9.Jorge, her reaction, looking at the dragon in the shop, going in, his awkwardness, getting the gift, giving it to Amy?

10.Jerry, his background, prison, his nasty comments to Jorge? Flirting with Amy?

11.The woman on the staff, her family, Thanksgiving, her being hurt by her family? Her friendship?

12.The owner, his wife, going away for Thanksgiving, Florida?

13.Amy, her support, the customers?

14.The customer, the menu, being alone, the fish soup, his choking, the staff finding it difficult, Jorge and his using the procedure?

15.A glimpse of people, characters, changing, the possibility of growth? A portrait of human nature, defects – but kindness?

 

 

 

BONNEVILLE

 

US, 2007, 93 minutes, Colour.
Jessica Lange, Kathy Bates, Joan Allen, Christine Baranski, Tom Selleck, Victor Rasuk.
Directed by Christopher N. Rowley.

 

A Bonneville (for those who, like this reviewer, do not know) is a vintage American car. So, this is an American road movie – with a difference. The passengers in the car are three woman of more mature age. The journey takes them from Idaho to Utah, to Arizona and Nevada (and Las Vegas) to California and Santa Barbara – with a postscript in Mexico. The vintage car serves them well.

 

The reason for the journey is a funeral service.

 

Jessica Lange plays Arvilla, the wife of an anthropologist who has died in Borneo. She has returned to their home in Pocatello, Idaho, with his ashes. The difficulty is that his adult daughter from his first marriage wants to bury the ashes in the family plot. Clash. The daughter, Francine, is played with haughty assumptions by Christine Baranski. She threatens to evict Arvilla if she does not comply with the funeral arrangements because no new will can be found leaving the house to Arvilla.

 

When Arvilla decides to give in, she persuades her two friends, the bumptious extraverted Margean (Kathy Bates) and the prim Morman wife and mother, Carol, who has never travelled (Joan Allen) to accompany her. She revisits the special places in her life with her husband, the salt lakes, the canyons and the lakes, Las Vegas... and, on their arrival in Santa Barbara, the urn is considerably lighter.

 

Along the way, there is lots of girl talk, camaraderie, some fights, drawing Carol out of her careful reserve. She is thunderstruck when she wins the jackpot in Las Vegas with a dollar from a woman whose hotel profession she misunderstood. They encounter a genial young man (Victor Rasuk) who helps them with their flat tyre. They meet a friendly truckie (Tom Selleck) who is a godsend for Margean.

 

The locations are attractive, the dialogue has pep but it is the strength of the four actresses who make the film.

 

1.A piece of Americana? Women’s stories? Age stories?

 

2.America: the Idaho locations, Utah and the salt lakes, Nevada and the canyons, Las Vegas, California, the beaches, Mexico? The scenery, the roads, the lakes, the mountains, the desert, the sea?

 

3.The title, the old car, the classic, its past, ownership, driving, experience?

 

4.The cast, their status? The musical score and moods? The songs – on the radio?

 

5.The situation, the death, Arvilla as a widow? Francine and her motivation, wanting to bury her father? The different experiences of grief? The clash, the challenge, the urn with the ashes, the planning of the service, the issue of the ownership of the house?

 

6.Jessica Lang as Arvilla, her age, living in Idaho, not having travelled, her marriage, going around the world, Papua New Guinea and the mementos, her husband dying in Borneo? His manuscript and her intending to finish it? Bringing home the urn, wanting to scatter the ashes? Francine’s visit, her husband, the clash, the issue of the will? Arvilla and her searching? Francine owning the house? Arvilla as a character, her friendship with Margean, Carol?

 

7.The house, Arvilla at home, sharing it with her husband? His moving from Santa Barbara to Idaho? The arguments, Arvilla’s search for the will, her decision about the house, to go, buying the plane tickets?

 

8.Margean and her background, widow, extroverted and lively? Earthy? The contrast with Carol, her devotion to her husband, never travelling, the Mormon background, the Book of Mormon? Her puritanical attitudes? Finding it difficult to relax and enjoy issues?

 

9.Setting out, the car, their discussions, the urn, their discussions, the decision to go by car?

 

10.The interactions, Carol and her concerns, Arvilla saying she was always right? Margean and her sense of freedom? Arvilla and the arguments with Carol?

 

11.Going to the lake, the expanses, Arvilla’s memories? Meeting Bo, the flat tyre, waiting, his help, changing the tyre? Carol and her fear? The drive, his story, searching for his father? Cleaning the car, the meal? His being an inspiration because of fulfilling his dream?

 

12.Eamon, in the truck, the girls passing him? The later meeting, Margean being cold, Carol and her reaction, wary? Arvilla and the plan to meet in Las Vegas? Meeting him there, his buying a suit? The meal, Margean and her flirting, going dancing? The later meetings, in the desert, a future?

 

13.The motels, the women sharing, arguing, the waterbed and Carol relaxing? The boat, running aground, Margean and the spoilt meal? Carol and her making sandwiches?

 

14.Arvilla, scattering the ashes in the various places, the salt lake, from the boat, in the canyon?

 

15.Carol, at the casino, the prostitute and her misinterpretation, giving her the dollar, winning the jackpot, the consequences, wondering what she would do?

 

16.Francine, her worry, the phone (and her eccentric call sound)?

 

17.Carol and the change, her getting the ashes in the desert, putting them in the urn?

 

18.The drive, held up by the police, arriving late, Francine and her good manners, the group gathered, her speech, thanking Arvilla, tripping, the urn breaking, the ashes scattering, the discovery of the truth?

 

19.Going to Mexico, enjoying the beach?

 

20.Arvilla, writing the letter to Francine – and the possibilities for a satisfying future?

 

 

 

 

 

UN POCO DE CHOCOLADE

Spain, 2008, 93 minutes, Colour.
Hector Alterio, Daniel Bruhl.
Directed by Aitzol Aramaio.

A light, very sweetly flavoured story of friendship.

An old man (Hector Alterio), cantankerous in his ways, goes home from hospital, to the relief of the staff, to the care of his sister. He is already mixing memories, moving easily back into his past as if it were the present. In the meantime, a young man (Daniel Bruehl) has come to Barcelona from the country and, finding the empty house, has squatted there. A young woman has seen him in the square and is attracted.

The old man and his sister accept the presence of the young man who shows himself concerned and attentive, caring for the old man (and preparing sushi which the old couple are to polite to tell him that they dislike). The old man glides in and out of memories of his long-dead wife and the scenes of their young days on the streetcars of the city.

Not all that much happens in terms of plot: meals at home, illness alarms, a picnic in the country, flashbacks of memories, the young man and woman in love and marrying. Rather, it is the atmosphere, of warmth and human kindness on the part of all the characters that make the film a pleasant experience. It is of interest to see as part of the career of Daniel Bruehl. (The American dubbed version is to be avoided – it makes it sound American slangy and a very badly performed soap.)

1.A slight Spanish confection? Characters? Situations? Magic realism?

2.The city setting, the hospital, the homes, the landmarks? Authentic feel? The musical score?

3.Lukas and his dying at the opening, his reminiscences, returning to his death at the end, the falling snow?

4.Lukas’s character, old, fighting in the war, his woodwork after the war, his love for Rosa, marriage? In the hospital, his reminiscences, Rosa present to him, his friends and Matteus, playing ball, the streetcar? Rosa on the streetcar? Her coming into his life, coming into the picnic lunch, the friends coming? The ghosts and memories of his past?

5.Lukas as cantankerous, the hospital wanting him home, Maria taking him home? Finding Marcos? Allowing him to stay, the music, the meal – but not wanting to eat the sushi? Maria and Lukas and their pretence? Relying on Marcos, his kindness, spending time with Lukas? Helping him when ill?

6.Marcos, coming to the city, begging, playing the accordion? The pervasive music? Roma seeing him, following him? Their meeting, falling in love? Marcos going to his parents, returning, with Roma, helping Lukas and Maria? The meals, the time spent together? The picnic, Marcos’s aunt? The gathering – the meal, the ghosts arriving? The dancing and the pairing?

7.The return home, Marcos and Roma marrying? A future? The parallel with Lukas and Rosa? Maria and her happiness with her brother?

8.The magic touches, the characters? The little bit of chocolate and Lukas’s final comment?