THE SECRET OF MOONACRE

UK, 2008, 103 minutes, Colour.
Ioan Gruffudd, Dakota Richards, Tim Curry, Natascha Mc Elhlone, Juliet Stephenson, Augustus Prue, Andy Lindon, Michael Webber.
Directed by Gabor Csupo.

It is a reasonable complaint to make that most of the movie action leads are male, from James Bond to Harry Potter. Hermione does make her claim but ultimately follows Harry. There have been Lara Croft and Elektra and the girls in The Golden Compass and Inkheart, but compared with the Supermen, the Iron Men, the Spidermen... the women have been outnumbered.

So, on that count alone, The Secret of Moonacre, stands out from the other action adventures and mythical and imaginary stories. As you watch it, you realise that this is the aim of the film-makers and that the boys are going to give this one a miss.

The film is based on a 1946 novel, The Little White Horse, by Elizabeth Goudge. I presume we can believe the publicists when they tell us that it has been published in 16 languages and was the favourite childhood book of J.K.Rowling. It won the Carnegie Medal for children's literature in 1947 – and the publicist adds, 'The book appeals to consecutive generations of girls'. In a poll by The Independent is was voted top book for 8-12 year olds and still sells over 30,000 copies each year.

That certainly establishes the niche market and the girls (maybe 7 to 14) will quite enjoy it. It does not have the scope of the wilder imagination stories. There are some wonderful special effects but the storytelling tends to be quite plain.

The setting is the 1870s, Victorian London and then the remote English coast. This means a lot of attention to décor and, especially, to dresses.

Our heroine is a strong-minded girl, Maria Merrywether, whose father's death means that she has to live with her stern uncle. However, her father, having lost all his money and house through gambling, has bequeathed her a fantasy book about Moonacre. This comes alive for Maria: a wedding several hundred years earlier which was to be happy for a magical Moon Princess but was thwarted by a clash between her family, the De Noirs (who do dress in black), and her fiance's family, the Merrywethers. The Moonacre Valley is cursed. The moon is growing larger and threatens to overwhelm the valley in darkness. A descendant of the De Noirs fled to marry a Merrywether (Maria's uncle) but they quarrelled and she lives in the woods while he lives in his mansion, a grumpy man. Her family roam the forest, the father bent on vengeance.

So, that is the scenario for Maria to confront, overcome the curse, bring the lovers together and restore peace and light to the valley.

Dakota Blue Richards proved herself in The Golden Compass. Her difficulties are not so great this time but she faces them with determination. Natascha Mc Elhone is the Moon Princess and the abandoned bride. Ioan Gruffudd is the crusty uncle while Tim Curry is De Noir. Juliet Stevenson is along as Maria's protective guardian with a trapped wind problem – and takes over many a scene with her kind of pantomime dame comedy.

Gabor Csupo animated the early seasons of The Simpsons and The Rugrats and directed the fine children's fable,The Bridge to Terabithia.

1.A fantasy, a book provoking the imagination? The influence of the book on writes like J.K. Rowling?

2.The niche audience, girls between eight and twelve, the film geared for them, for their parents, for their mothers?

3.The background of Victorian England, the visuals of London, the courts and houses, the lectures, the countryside, the woods, the mansion, the coast and the cliffs, the sea, the amphitheatre at the top of the cliff? Atmosphere for realism and for fantasy? The musical score?

4.The prologue on the past, the Moon Princess, coming from the sea, her gift, the strand of pearls, the wedding, the clash between the families, the change in hostility, the lost pearls?

5.Maria and her father’s death, Miss Heliotrope looking after her, the will, his bequeathing the book to her, her reading the book, its coming alive in the story of the Moon Princess?

6.The journey to her uncle’s house, the difficult journey, Miss Heliotrope and her troubles, the beauty of the countryside? Benjamin and his hard attitude, the room and the fantasy, the milk and the biscuits appearing? The fantasy of Moonacre?

7.The realism: Maria, her age? A proud girl, strong? Breakfast, her dealings with her uncle, going into the forest, the warnings about going into the forest? Wandering, the encounter with Robin? Her fears? The story of the De Noirs? The dog, fierce, its help in defending her? Going for the ride on the pony – and becoming lost, the dog rescuing her?

8.Miss Heliotrope, the caricature of the governess, mannered, comic, her wind, big breakfast, her fears, fainting, her help at the end, the proposal of marriage?

9.The cook, appearing and disappearing, his magic kitchen? The butler, his presence, his help?

10.The De Noirs and the Meriwether traditions, hostilities? The influence of the pearls?

11.Loveday, her place in her family, her wanting to marry Benjamin, her father and the family thinking she had betrayed them? The break with Benjamin, each of them proud? Her living as a hermit in the forest? Her friendship with Maria?

12.Benjamin and De Noir, the actors portraying them in the past, in the present?

13.Robin, his place in the family, the dominance of his father, the way of life in the forest and the ruins, hunting? The encounters with Maria, the rabbit in the trap? His capturing her, her escape, the chase, her trapping him, guiding Maria at the end?

14.Loveday, the plan by Maria, writing the notes, Benjamin and Loveday meeting, discovering the truth?

15.The pearls, the greed, the De Noirs and their feeling they had the right to the pearls?

16.The visuals of the moon, its coming closer to the earth, the threat of destroying the earth?

17.Maria and Robin, her catching him in the noose, his helping her, the pursuit? Finding the tree for the pearls, the cook and his memory of the tree? The different groups in the forest, the pursuit?

18.The tree, the cavern, the search for the pearls, discovering them?

19.People assembling on the amphitheatre, the moon coming closer, Maria and her self-sacrifice in the sea?

20.The huge wage, the horses emerging from the sea, Maria’s reappearance? The fate of the pearls? Happiness for all?

21.A work of the imagination, the female dominance, the feminine perspective?

ROLE MODELS

US, 2008, 101 minutes, Colour.
Seann William Scott, Paul Rudd, Christopher Mintz- Plasse, Bobb’e J. Thompson, Elizabeth Banks, Jane Lynch, Ken Jeong.
Directed by David Wain.

American comedies are getting harder and harder to review. One of the reasons is that, in recent decades, Americans have exercised a concerted push to get over their traditional Puritanism about humour, especially about sex, and are continually overcoming their inhibitions. This sometimes means, as with the comedies from Jud Apatow, there is a great deal of funny stuff, peppered with expletives and, for those who get it, plenty of innuendo. And the reason, they are hard to review is that often they are very funny, sometimes in an 'off-colour' way and are not embarrassed (as some of the audience may be) by the treatment of sex and humour.

This applies to Role Models which has its heart in the right place but its jokes are in the, at least, above-PG area. It is often very funny.

Paul Rudd (who is one of the writers) is Danny and Sean William Scott (whom audiences tend to identify with his uninhibited Stifler character from American Pie – and he is not entirely different here) is Wheeler. They work long at a silly routine for schools. They foster an anti-drug campaign and promote a soda called Minotaur. Rudd gives the spiel and Scott is dressed as a dancing minotaur. After ten years, this gets too much for Danny and he breaks, and is ditched by his long-time girlfriend (Elizabeth Banks).

After several legal mishaps they are sentenced to 150 hours community work at Sturdy Wings, a centre for difficult or unwanted children, run by a very comically eccentric Jane Lynch.

You know, of course, where this is going: the resistance from the kids, the ineptitude of Danny and Wheeler, the bonding, the mistakes and crises, the happy ending. But, you wonder how it will get there.

The two boys are very good. Christopher Mintz- Plasse is the very embodiment of the bespectacled nerd who is most at home living and doing battle in a make-believe world a la Lord of the Rings and caught up in the re-enactments in the local park. Bobb'e J. Thompson is a ten year old with a mouth, vocabulary and attitude that would give Stifler a run for his money (and does do that to Wheeler).

Obviously, if you are feeling in a proper and prim mood, this is not for you. Otherwise, a guilty entertainment – justified, of course, by the correct ending!

1.An American raucous comedy? Free-wheeling characters, attitudes, behaviour, language, sexuality, exploitative characters? And the process of their being reformed?

2.The irony of the title, the audience knowing that they will change – but how?

3.An LA story, humour, jokes, farce, repartee? Innuendo and explicit jokes and situations? The songs and musical score?

4.Wheeler and Danny at their job, the soft drink, energy, their performance, Wheeler in disguise, the high school students, the speeches, their performance? Comic, anti-drug? Their vehicle? Ten years of performances? Danny tired of it? Wheeler free-wheeling? Their later behaviour and upsetting the students and teachers?

5.Danny, his relationship with Beth, the years together, his hopes, the offhand proposal, her work as a lawyer, breaking up with him? The effect on Danny?

6.The truck, the parking, the police, the driving of the truck, the catapulting, on the statue? Danny and his going on a bender, destructive, hyper-energy from the drink?

7.Wheeler and his personality, satisfied with his life, no ambition? His friendship with Danny? Audience sympathy for them or not?

8.In the court, Beth, the judge, sentenced to community service?

9.Meeting with Gayle, her organisation, Sturdy Wings? Her style, the pep talk, matter-of-fact, the humour, her past, her eccentricities? Her demands on Danny and Wheeler?

10.Sturdy Wings and its philosophy? The children, the sessions, Gayle introducing them to the boys? The role of parents and absent parents? The Big and the Littles?

11.Ronnie, his age, black and the jokes about race, his precocious language, behaviour? His mother being desperate? His stepfather? The clashes?

12.Augie, the bespectacled nerd, his parents and his father’s demands, their mocking him? His interest in the mediaeval games, dressing up, the language of Old England, the jousts, the historical re-creations? The title, Laire? Danny and his having to go, his lack of interest, his participation and his being bested? His sullen response?

13.Going on the camp, everyone together, the stories, the older men bonding with the youngsters, the possibilities for friendship? Wheeler, his sexual behaviour, the reactions?

14.Their failures, Danny and failing at Laire, Augie and his participation, the confrontation of the king and his court in the diner? Augie kicked out? Wheeler, taking Ronnie to the party, his selfish behaviour, losing Ronnie, searching for him? Ronnie going home, the exasperation of his mother?

15.The court date? Their not showing up? Danny and his idea, going to Laire, getting dressed up? The hopelessness of the cause? The players taking things seriously? Danny’s change, Augie and his support of him? Augie and his love for Esplen, her supporting him in the battle? The fight, the new team, the confronting of the king, Augie as the victor?

16.The parents and their pride in Augie, Ronnie’s mother and her forgiveness? Gayle and her being impressed? Beth and her being encouraged by Danny showing an interest in life? A suitable change, for the better, and a happy ending?

THE PUNISHER:WAR ZONE

(US, 2008, d. Lexi Alexander)

Sadistic, to say the least.

Butchery of enemies is the main cause of complaint. There is a savagery in the way that the Punisher wreaks vengeance on his targets (most of them quite worthless human specimens) and in the way that the villains relish their brutality.

In reading the press notes and the statements of the film-makers about the graphic novels and their fidelity to them as well as their owing it to Punisher fans to remain faithful, one is impressed by the high-minded expressions. While the Punisher is not a super-human hero with extraordinary powers, he is not a role model. He is a vigilante, overwrought by the brutal deaths of his wife and children (suggested in flashbacks and in his visit to the cemetery) who wants to eliminate corruption. He becomes a law unto himself, a morose avenger. When he kills an undercover agent along with a Mafia coven, he is consumed by remorse and a desire to help the widow and her daughter.

On paper, that sounds a potential exploration of contemporary justice themes. However, the stolid performance by Ray Stevenson as Frank Castle, the Punisher, tends to conceal rather than reveal what might be going on in his heart and conscience. If the brutality were to be modified and not so self-indulgently ugly, then it might have been an interesting exploration of themes.

The technical craft and effects are top-class and Dominic West as the facially deformed Jigsaw is obviously relishing the opportunity to ham up the psychopathic aspects of his mania. But, the visual sadism is too much.

NICK AND NORA'S INFINITE PLAYLIST

(US, 2008, d. Peter Sollett)

Even the title, with its references to downloading, laying down record tracks and the I-Pod? culture, means some reviewers will be feeling a touch antique or out-of-date. This is a film about teens at the end of high school. Some of them have grown up (comparatively speaking) too fast and are on a track to alcoholism, promiscuity and burn-out before 20. So, this is a sometimes indulgent look at clubbing and its effect on the young.

However... Nick and Nora are not quite that type of teenager. Nora is a somewhat reserved daughter of a record company boss but does not make much of it. Rather, she keeps an eye on her disaster-prone school friend (depressingly, it is revealed they go to Sacred Heart school). Nick is a reserved nerdish type, who lays down tracks, especially for his fickle girlfriend, and is socially awkward while being able to be articulately straightforward opinions. He belongs to a band made up of three gay friends (of the partying variety).

This is one of those overnight stories where teens are looking for clues to find where their favourite band is playing. Along the way, misfortune, misunderstanding – and some reconciliation. The drinking girl goes immediately to binge, then goes to pieces, getting lost. Nora wants to find her. The band want to set up Nick with Nora. They lose the drunken girl. And so on.

Some of the dialogue is amusing, especially Nick and his observations on life. He is played by Michael Cera in the engaging dorkish manner he used in Superbad and Juno. Kat Jennings is good as Nora – but a bit hard to believe, given her appearance and obviously strong character, that she is so reserved and diffident.

The vagaries of a night on the town by teens who are not supervised or accountable – with some final touches, briefly, of hope.

MY MOM'S NEW BOYFRIEND

(US, 2007, d. George Gallo)

Did anyone years ago, while watching When Harry Met Sally, Sleepless in Seattle or You've Got Mail, ever fantasise about seeing Meg Ryan in a fat-suit? For those who didn't, here she is, larger than any anti-obesity ad. It's only in the first few minutes of this comedy (and a photo or two later) that she appears as a gross-out, but here she is.

Meg Ryan has made only a few films in recent years and is not up there amongst the top-drawer stars. Whether she should have said 'yes' to this film is a reasonable question. In the past she got by on a kind of giggly, girlish charm. Now, in her mid-40s, she obviously wants a change of image and has gone for rough and raucous (but still giggly – with the touch of the screech).

This is a romantic comedy which has some entertaining ideas but doesn't quite bring them to life. Antonio Banderas does his usual thing as a charming Mediterranean who happens to be an art thief and falls in love with the rejuvenated Meg. Colin Hanks (in a role that his father might have played twenty five years ago) is Meg's rather proper son who is an FBI agent. Selma Blair, in letting-her-hair-down mode, is his fiancee, also an agent.

When the son has to use surveillance on the thief, he listens in to his mother's escapades, unsettling for him – though he brings the case to a satisfying conclusion and promotion along with a romantic twist that we should have seen coming.

Mild – and we need a better Meg Ryan comeback film.

MY BLOODY VALENTINE 3D

(US, 2008, d. Patrick Lussier)

Bloody, all right – or bloody all wrong.

The original My Bloody Valentine was released in 1981, one of the many slasher films that followed the box-office success of Halloween and Friday the 13th (incidentally re-made in 3D, early 2009). This version keeps a number of the elements of the original. The more interesting aspects are those of the decline of a mining town. However, that is not what the fans will be wanting to see.

This is not quite a slasher film in the sense that the serial killer takes his pick – his tool of impalement is the mining pick. You know where you stand early in the piece when the lone survivor of a mine accident wakes from coma and massacres everyone in sight, clad in his mining suit and mask which enables victims and audience to hear his ominous breathing. Since this is 3D, we have in depth close-ups of pick blows, blood gushes and flying gory body parts. When ten years later, the killings start again, we know we are in for more of the same as victims are picked off (so to speak).

The sex component is introduced and is rather sleazy with one character having to be chased and defend her life for several minutes, naked. Acting is not a major requirement here. The director is Patrick Lussier, long-time editor, and director of the very interesting Dracula 2000.

Sitting in the cinema, glasses perched on ordinary glasses, making judgement on the morality of the film, and thinking the motivation for the killings was quite trite, I found that I had completely missed reading the cues and clues concerning the murderer and picked (so to speak again) the wrong killer!

MONKEY PUZZLE

Australia, 2008, 90 minutes, Colour.
Ben Geurens,Ryan Johnson, Ella Scott Lynch, Socratis Otto.
Directed by Mark forstmann.

Those who know their trees will not think that this is a mystery about chimps. The monkey puzzle of the title is a tree in the Blue Mountains outside Sydney that means a lot to the central character, Carl (Ben Geurens). It may not mean so much to the audience.

This is one of those films that seems to have been written by a very young man, about very young men and women (20 or so), whose horizons are fairly limited and whose life experience so far has not been particularly profound or even interesting. Their incidental chat tends to be of the crasser kind.

We are invited to join them in a bush walk in the Blue Mountains. They leave on Good Friday and there are some hints of meaning about Easter but, by and large, it gets limited to Easter eggs.

The men are two friends. Carl's brother has died tragically some years earlier and Dylan was his friend. However, as the trip goes on, Dylan, as they say, continues to 'mess up', losing the map and leaving the food out overnight so that it is devoured by scavenging animals. There are two young women along and an older man who needs to pick up a car after the trek.

The group explores, squabbles, worries about food. Dylan disappears. Zach is injured in a fight. Will they find the tree? Will they get out safely? Will they give more thought to the meaning of their lives? A qualified 'yes' to some of the above.

1.A thriller? A film of young adults? For young adults, about young adults?

2.The Sydney settings? The Blue Mountains, their beauty, ruggedness, the mountains themselves, the canyons, the valleys, the creeks? Atmosphere? The musical score?

3.The title, the tree, its place in Carl’s life, Darryl’s, his brother’s?

4.The structure of the film: the meeting of the characters, the encounter with Zach, the going to the Blue Mountains, the beginning of the trek, the difficulties, the injuries, the clashes, the quest for the tree? Coping with the disasters? The uncertainty of Carl at the ending?

5.The young people, twenty-year-olds, their limited horizons, lack of experience of life? Their chatter, crass, sexual innuendo? Yet the references to Durkheim and sociology?

6.Zach, his car, the accident, his having to go with the group? Being older than them?

7.The introduction to the different members of the group: Carl and his leadership, Darryl and his friendship? Pippa and her relationship with Darryl? Toni and her health problems? The discussions about relationships? Sexual experience? Darryl and his secret relationship with Pippa, Carl and his enquiries about her?

8.The trip, the explaining of the quest? Carl and his brother, Darryl and the relationship to the dead brother?

9.In the mountains, the walk, going down the cliff, the rope? Darryl leaving the map behind? His memory, Carl’s memory – their playing games to decide the direction of the waterfall?

10.The continuing of the journey, moods, meals? Toni and her vegetarianism and her strict principles?

11.The sexual relationships? The tension between Pippa and Darryl? Carl, talking, his advances, Pippa’s reactions? Succumbing to him? Toni and her watching from the sidelines?

12.The food, the animals eating it? The lack of provisions, the Easter eggs? The effect on each of them? Toni and her low blood sugar, needing the food? Her moods?

13.Darryl, his going off by himself, finding the rock steps? Getting the fish? Going back to the group? The tensions within the group?

14.Darryl going off by himself? The group not able to find him? Zach, the fight with Carl, Zach and his injuries? Their having to carry Zach? The concern about Darryl?

15.Carl finding Darryl, his injuries, his discussions with Carl about the dead brother? His being with him when he died? Speeding? Darryl unable to move? Carl leaving him – the implication of the mercy killing?

16.Carrying Zach to safety, going up the cliff, the possibilities for saving Zach? The girls? Carl sitting on the rock and the enigmatic ending?

MARLEY AND ME

US, 2008, 115 minutes, Colour.
Owen Wilson, Jennifer Aniston, Erick Dane, Alan Arkin, Kathleen Turner.
Directed by David Frankl.

Dogs.

Wedding, dogs, jobs, dogs, family, dogs – and dogs.

Marley is a very big labrador who has a voracious appetite, which is not limited to food. Any object around the house is worthy of a bite and a chew. While cuddly, Marley could also knock over the unsuspecting bystander.

Dog lovers have taken this film to heart. It made over $100,000,000 in the US alone during the 2008 Christmas period. (Although one dog lover confided that Marley's life was too untrained and undisciplined and she found the film rather trying.)

For those who have been almost bowled over at the front door of friends' homes by seemingly marauding and leaping dogs, Marley and Me might recall canine traumas.

That said, Marley and Me is a pleasant, agreeable film. In fact, it is very, very traditional in its presentation of marriage, love, children and family – and pets. Perhaps this is why it has appealed, a wholesome look at nice values.

Owen Wilson brings his genial laid-back comic approach to the role of John Grogan, a would-be reporter who has a talent for writing newspaper columns, observations of life in the suburbs – and about Marley. Jennifer Aniston has an opportunity to take on something more substantial as Jen Grogan, reporter, then mother.

There are some added bonuses, a glimpse of Kathleen Turner as a curmudgeonly dog trainer (who can't get the better of Marley) and Alan Arkin as Grogan's world-weary editor.

After spending almost two hours with John and Jen and then with their children, and moving from sunny Florida to snow Pennsylvania, we have to face the fact that Marley is getting old and, considering what has gone into Marley's stomach over the years, death is a possibility. 'Oh, you who have tears, prepare to shed them now.'

Yes, there can be feel-sad, feel-good films.

1.The popularity of the film? Traditional values? American family? Work ethic? The focus on pets and dogs?

2.John Grogan and his career, as a journalist, columnist, his observations about life and politics in Florida, his columns about Marley, success, readership? His wanting to be a reporter? Wanting to change, go to Philadelphia? Finally accepting his talent as a columnist?

3.Florida and its atmosphere, the homes, the coast and beaches, the workplace, newspaper offices? The contrast with the change to Pennsylvania, the newspapers, the mansion, the snow? Audiences identifying with him?

4.The bright colour of the visual style, the musical score?

5.The wedding, Jen and John, happiness, making their home in Florida, each getting jobs, Jen and her success, John and his interview with the editor, trying to read the editor’s mind, Sebastian as his friend, helper? His reports? Jen and her covering of trials? Reading each other’s columns?

6.Sebastian and his friendship, way of life, free, relationships with women, a reporter and the political events of the day, going overseas, his suggestion to John about the dog? His ultimate success in New York? The ending – the meeting with John in the street, his going off with the women? A kind of freedom – contrasting with John’s life?

7.Owen Wilson as John, his screen presence, laidback style, his love for Jen, his skill at his work, wanting to be a reporter, dealing with the editor and his moods, writing the column? The relationship with Jen, the prospect of children? Sebastian’s advice about the dog? Jen and the surprise, the blindfold, the attraction to the dogs, to Marley? The deal? The hopes, trying for pregnancy? The discussions about having babies? John and Jen and their joy, the disaster of the miscarriage? Jen pregnant again, John and his life at home, the various pregnancies? The births? The ups and downs of the marriage? Marley’s constant presence?

8.The children, family life, Jen and her exasperation, Marley’s presence and Marley with the children? John and his moving in with Sebastian? Needing space? Talking things over, the reconciliation and mutual understanding?

9.The years passing, the family growing, the children growing up, Marley’s being with them?

10.The change to Pennsylvania, the big house, the job, John meeting Sebastian in the street? His discussions with the editor? The nature of columns, the nature of reporting?

11.The film’s focus on Marley, on labradors, finding the baby Marley, love at first sight, buying the dog? The attempts at training and the comic scenes with the trainer, her frustrations? Marley eating all the foot, rough in the house, on the beach – and all the owners unleashing their dogs – Marley disgracing John, the police arriving? The dog and its chewing everything in the house? Becoming part of the household?

12.Marley, the trip to Pennsylvania, the stomach upset, going to the vet, the children and their anxiety, Marley coming home? Getting sick again, going outside, with the vet, Marley being put down? The various reactions, the burial and the children and their speeches?

13.The ideal family, nice, the husband and wife, in love, dealing with their problems, the commitment to work, the children and their education, growing up? The popularity of this kind of theme for American audiences?

LUCKY MILES

Australia, 2007, 102 minutes, Colour.
Kenneth Morelada, Rodney Afie, Srisaco Sacopraseuth, Glen Shea, Sawung Jabo, Don Haney, Julian Jones, Andrew S. Gilbert, Deborah Mailman, Edwin Hodgman, Gerard Kennedy.
Directed by Michael James Rowland.

At the end of the film we see that 'Lucky Miles' is the name of a bus company that operates in the north west of Western Australia. This is the bus line that the characters in this film hope to use to get to Perth. They have no idea of how far away it is. The thing is, they are illegal immigrants, refugees stranded by Indonesian fisherman who have taken their money. One group is from Cambodia. Another group is from Iraq. They have made their way towards Australia via Indonesia and now they are lost. Some of them are found by the authorities. Two of them elude capture and are joined by one of the fishermen in a trek through the desert – the unlucky miles.

Since 1788, any newcomer to Australia has had to migrate, easily by plane or, with so many, with great difficulty by boat. The three men are different and strong characters. The Iraqui (Rodney Afif) is an educated man, an engineer. The Cambodian man (Kenneth Moraleda) is young and is looking for his Australian father who left his mother in Phnom Penh long since. The Indonesian fisherman is a bit of a rascal.

The writer director has based his screenplay on a number of actual stories of such migrants.

In pursuit is a genial group of army reservers, two of whom are aboriginal and who are able to track the men (but delayed when the non-aboriginal is careless with their van and it gets bogged). They are controlled from headquarters by a friendly voice (Deborah Mailman).

One of the striking features of Lucky Miles is its photography. Many of the vistas of desert or of coast are stunning.

The drama is not just the trek and its hardships and their almost dying in the inhospitable desert but also the interactions, short-temperedness and angers of the men. And, in the background, is a chorus of hard-drinking and tough workers who populate the outback.

The film is topical in its picture of people dreaming that Australia is their refuge and discovering harsher realities. It is topical in its presentation of the multi-ethnic variety that makes up Australia as well as an acknowledgement of aborigines in the 20th and 21st centuries.

1.The impact of the film, for Australians, for Asians, for the world audiences? Refugee issues? Cultural issues?

2.The themes reflecting the end of the 20th century and refugees? The conflicts of the 21st century? Based on true stories?

3.The refugees from Asia, from the Middle East? Boat people? Their rights for asylum? Their dreams, unreality about the nature of Australia, the terrain, the people? The brokers and their money, exploiting the refugees? The Australian police, government policy?

4.The title, the irony, the bus company, the role of buses and the absence of buses?

5.The boats, the refugees going to Indonesia, the fishermen getting the money, the fishermen’s stories, their families, debts, relationships, favours to nephews and sisters, deals, the inhumanity, the landing of the refugees, the lack of scruple? The lack of care? The ignorance about Australia, the population, the land? The boat sinking, the Indonesians having to experience the desert themselves, being lost?

6.The arrival, the boat, the underwater photography, the beach, the two groups, on the sand, looking for the bus, waving for the boat to stop, their decisions about walking? The importance of language, the subtitles?

7.The beauty of the Australian terrain, the quality of the colour photography, the beaches and the coast, the aerial shots, the desert, the sand, the mountains? The waterholes? The variety of landscapes in the Pilbara?

8.The Cambodians and their walking, lost, Arun and his desire to go to Perth, finding the pub, the talk in the pub, the drunks, the woman at the bar, drinking, calling the police, their being taken in the van, Arun hiding?

9.The Middle East group, walking, lost, arguing, Youssef and his objections, the man with the knife, the political differences, Youssef as a structural engineer and his intelligence? The fight, Youssef falling over the cliff, the man going back to the group, saying that Youssef was dead and lying? Their later being taken?

10.Ramalan and the lighter, the fire in the boat, sinking, on land, his wandering away from the group, through the desert?

11.Plank, Shayne and Tom, kicking the football, the radio messages, army reservists, their search, Tom and his ability to track, contacting Lisa and getting orders, following the group, the swim in the hole, the truck crashing into the waterhole, winching it out, finding the house? Their personalities, friendship, interactions, exasperation about the truck? The Aborigines and their tradition? Aborigines and tracking in the 21st century?

12.The encounters, Youssef and Arun meeting, the chase, Youssef losing his shoe, their clash, the biscuits and water, the map, their misreading it, not understanding the terrain at all? Meeting Ramalan, the conflict? Going to Perth or Broome? The shoes, the camp, the fire, the food, through the desert, the mountains, the waterhole? Their arguing, Ramalan and his taunting, their separation, all landing up in the hut, the food, the utility, the fire? Youssif and his skills, fixing the ute?

13.The cabin of the boat, harsh, the other man, their talking and walking along the shore? The separation, the man finding the hut, the Aborigines and giving him food – and his toying with the ice cream and jelly? The captain, taking the bike, riding, encountering the truck, pulling the gun, his fall after Ramalan hit him with the shovel? His arrest?

14.The ute, going backwards, Arun and his anger, going into the bush? Youssif and Ramalan, their hands up, the surrender, the gun? The police, the helicopter and the rescue? The others running to find Arun?

15.The TV news, the people in the bar watching it, the comment about Australians not being able to survive for a week? The information about the groups?

16.Arun, the prologue, his father leaving his mother in Cambodia? The end and his knocking at the door?

17.The important themes of refugees – and the moral responsibility of Australians and their treatment of refugees and their different cultures?

JCVD

Belgium, 2008, 97 minutes, Colour.
Jean- Claude Van Damme.
Directed by Mabrouk L. Mechri.

Who or what does JCVD stand for? A Japanese company? A slogan for Justice?

If you belong to the movie martial arts community, you would never ask that kind of question. Everybody knows that this is the acronym for the muscles from Brussels, Jean Claude Van Damme.

Van Damme is one of those surprising stars who has gathered an enormous following over more than twenty years. He is short. He has very limited range in his acting abilities. Nevertheless, he has his fans. Just look at comments on the IMDb about each of his films, even the weakest of them (which has been the case in his choice of movies in more recent years).

He and his writer and director had a brainwave about a different kind of film, one that could capitalise on his reputation, his on-screen talent – and his personal difficulties concerning custody of his daughter and the LA courts. What they have done is set up an emergency visit by Van Damme to a suburban Brussels post office to get a money order. Fair enough, and the fans he meets on the way are delighted. However, when he insists that the office open, he finds a hold-up in progress and he becomes one of the hostages. The ringleader is not impressed with him but one of the robbers wants to indulge in hero worship.

The twist is that the robbers decide to make it look as if Van Damme is doing the robbery to get his money for his lawyers who threaten to quit. We see the robbery from the police point of view, from the outside and with a doctor and an officer who go into the building. Then we see it from the inside, how Van Damme is being forced, the same actions with a much different reality than the previous appearances. And a fight showdown.

Van Damme is more interesting than usual, with some flashbacks to the court proceedings and, above all, a monologue straight to camera about himself, his hopes, ambitions, mistakes and regrets, his plans for better films (despite the scenes with his agent and the usual agent palaver). One presumes that, like Marlon Brando, he had cue cards to read this long speech from. But, it works quite well.

Not a bad interlude for our hero before he goes back (as he did) to his straight-to-DVD B-grade actioners.

1.The fans of Jean- Claude Van Damme? This film for them? For a wider audience? A perspective on the action star?

2.The career of Jean- Claude Van Damme, in the 80s and 90s, his popularity, action movies, serious movies? The decline into straight-to-DVD action movies? His wanting to rehabilitate himself? The perspectives of his own life, marriage, divorce, custody hearing?

3.The American court scenes? The reality in Brussels, the suburb, the streets, the shops, the bank? Authentic feel? Police action? The musical score?

4.The structure of the film: Van Damme and his coming to the bank, talking to the fans in the shop, wanting the cheque? The perspective on the robbery? As if he were committing the robbery? The second part looking at the same material, his being victimised by the actual robbers? The resolution of the case? The evidence against him? The difficulties of the cheque, the money, the American case, his behaviour in the bank?

5.The introduction to Jean- Claude Van Damme in this film? Genial, talking to the fans, his concern about getting the money? In the bank and his insistence? The later scene of his soliloquy straight to camera, the reflection on his life, career, meaning? Sincerity?

6.The robbery, Van Damme’s viewpoint? His demands about the transfer, being taken hostage, the speaking to the police, the words of the robbers? His trying to prevent injuries to the other hostages? The demands of the robbers? The money going into his own account – and therefore the possible criminal proceedings? The leader of the gang, his brutality? The treatment of the hostages? Artur, his being a fan, discussing Van Damme’s films? The working out of the diversion, the hostages and the possibility of escape? Artur and the gun, shooting the gang member? The attack of the police? Artur being killed? The rescue? Van Damme being arrested?

7.The robbery from the point of view of the police, the windows, Van Damme and his words, interpreted that he was the robber? The hostages, the transfer of the money? The dilemmas of the police? The police sending in the doctor, stripping, the humiliation? Their assessment of the situation?

8.Van Damme and the arrest, the conviction, extortion – the money paying legal fees, the support of his daughter?

9.The background of Los Angeles, the court sequences, his love for his daughter, the issue of custody? His assessment of himself as a father?

10.In prison, teaching karate? The visit of his daughter?

11.The impact for an audience of a star portraying himself, the blend of fiction and fact?