RIP Sister Yvonne Berecry OLSH

21/10/1934 – 13/03/2022

Sad news this year with the deaths of so many sisters this year. Condolences to our sisters

“So long Thy Love has led me, surely it will lead me on”

As Yvonne looked back over her life’s journey, she realised how this prayer had helped her to accept the challenges, joys and difficulties of the many and varied apostolates she carried out as a Daughter of Our Lady of the Sacred Heart.

On Sunday 13th March, Jesus gently took Yvonne to himself. She was 87 years old and 67 years professed.

To Yvonne’s relatives and friends who loved her so much and are deeply saddened by her death, we offer our deep sympathy, prayers, and love. We also offer sympathy to those who join us via livestreaming from around the world and throughout Australia, especially our Sisters.

Yvonne Eleanor Berecry was born on 21st October, 1934. She was the second child of Mathew and Annie Berecry. The family lived on Sydney Lower North Shore and she grew up in an extended family situation. Her father was an interior painter and decorator, and her mother was a dress maker and loved craft. It’s clear she passed this love onto Yvonne. During the Second World War her father worked at the dockyards on Garden Island repainting warships. Inhaling these fumes made him seriously ill.

Yvonne’s father’s illness had a great impact on her and at age 10 she decided she would be a nurse so she could care for sick.

Yvonne attended Primary School at St Leonards, Naremburn and it was on her first Communion Day that Yvonne felt God was calling her to be a Religious Sister. After completing the Leaving Certificate at Loretto, Kirribilli, Yvonne told her parents of her desire to enter Religious Life, but they asked her to work for at least one year first, so she found employment at Singer Sewing School in Sydney, teaching sewing and attending to administrative tasks.

Yvonne said she tried to avoid answering God’s call to be a Sister even asking God to give her vocation to her only sister Gwen whom she believed would make a better nun than she would. Yvonne’s call to be a missionary sister grew stronger and stronger and eventually led her to the both the Marist Sisters and the Daughters of Our Lady of the Sacred Heart. After praying Yvonne felt Jesus was calling her to be a Daughter of Our Lady of the Sacred Heart. She entered the Novitiate in May 1953 at Hartzer Park.

60th anniversary celebration

After profession in 1955, Yvonne was sent to study at Kensington in preparation for teacher training. However, after one year, the Provincial found out that she was interested in nursing so she was sent to Our Lady of the Sacred Heart Hospital at Randwick to help out until the training school was commenced. The sisters had to turn three houses into a hospital and, although most of the time she worked in the kitchen, there was also cleaning, painting and many other jobs, including assisting as a Nurse’s Aide on evening. Yvonne was a hard worker and completed her tasks with enthusiasm and generosity.

Having completed her General Nurse training in April 1964, Yvonne went to Calvary Hospital, Adelaide, for midwifery training. By May 1965, she took off on her first mission - an appointment to the rather small mission at Daly River, some five hours drive southwest of Darwin. However, firstly she went to spend a few weeks with Sr Marion Whelan on Bathurst Island. Sr Marion became quite sick and Yvonne was left at Bathurst Island to carry on the nursing. This was quite a challenge but a very happy time in Yvonne’s life; she had a deep love and respect for the Tiwi people. She did not make it to Daly River!

In 1968, Yvonne returned to Randwick for a year and worked as a nurse in the hospital. The following year Yvonne was missioned to Papua New Guinea and ministered at Napapar in East New Britain, about 11 km from Rabaul, not far from the Baining Mountains. Here she experienced two earthquakes in 1970, ten days apart. The second one was quite severe at 6.4 and caused much damage at Napapar, particularly in the clinic.

After three years there, Yvonne returned to Sydney to do her Diploma of Nursing Education and in 1973 she returned as principal of the Nurse Training School at Paparatava, Rabaul. In 1977 she transferred to the Diocesan Hospital at Vunapope – this was a 300 bed hospital with 100 trainees: hospital nurses, rural health nurses and nurse-aides. Yvonne was very competent, dedicated and an enthusiastic nurse who treated her patients with compassion and kindness.

Baining Mountains

With failing health, Yvonne came to Sydney for diagnosis and treatment. As her health improved she worked in parishes in Toowoomba and Mascot and in 1986 she went to Santa Teresa to take care of the community library for a year. Yvonne enjoyed her time in this barren land in the heart of Australia and marvelled at the resilience of the local people who lived in the difficult desert conditions. The following year Yvonne moved to Darwin where she worked as the inter-church chaplain at Darwin hospital. Yvonne made many good friends in Darwin, and she remained close to them until her death. Returning to Kensington, Yvonne ministered at St Joseph’s Aged Care Facility as Diversional Therapist for fifteen years. She had a passion for the supreme value and dignity of human life in all its stages from conception to death.

Like her mother Yvonne was a gifted dressmaker, she was always willing to put her many gifts at the service of community. She possessed a particular flare for creating all kinds of decorations for Feast Days and other National Days such as Anzac Day and Melbourne Cup Day. These innovative talents were put to wonderful use in her role of Diversional Therapist for our Sisters and the Residents at St Joseph’s.

Sr Yvonne was a faithful, prayerful religious and always true to her vocation as a Daughter of Our Lady of the Sacred Heart. In 2013 as Yvonne’s health was failing, she joined the community of St Joseph’s at our aged care facility, where she was beautifully cared for until her death.

We will be ever grateful to Matthew, Annie and Berecry family for the gift of Yvonne to our Congregation!

Go in peace dear Yvonne, your lifelong Motto has been fulfilled ‘so long Thy Love has led me, surely it will lead me on.’

Thank you for your faith filled witness, generosity, and kindness.

May your courageous soul rest in peace.

Philippa Murphy fdnsc

31st March 2022

THE KILLING OF TWO LOVERS

US, 2020, 80 minutes, Colour.

Clane Crawford, Sepideh Moafi, Chris Coy.

Directed by Robert Machoian.

This is a small, brief, independent film. It was filmed in a small country town in Utah. It creates the atmosphere of the town very effectively, somewhat isolated, ordinary streets and shops and buildings, a range of homes.

The film introduces us to David, a middle-aged man, breaking into a house, threatening a sleeping person with the gun – but then leaving through the window. He then goes to see his father who is in bad health, his son caring for him though each critical of the other.

What emerges is that Nikki, his wife of many years, has separated, she caring for their four children, some raucous young boys, he having tested custody for visits. There is still some attraction between them and, oddly, they meet up regularly, sitting in David’s truck, talking, yet worrying about the children.

It emerges that Nikki is also seeing Derek. David is jealous, this leading to some confrontations between the two men, Derek physical and dominating.

The audience is left to wonder what reconciliation there can be, what future for David, any future for Nikki with Derek, the custody of the children.

A brief glimpse into the world of family breakup.

1. A small budget film? A brief film? US independent filmmaking?
2. The small town, the homes, the streets, supermarkets? The surrounding countryside? Authentic atmosphere? The musical score?
3. The title, audience expectations, the lovers being husband and wife, their love for each other, yet separation, family, the wife and the new boyfriend, the consequences? Especially for the husband, bewilderment, anger?
4. The opening, David and his gun, at the bed, leaving through the window, running home, living with his father, doing the chores, his demanding father, the conversations?
5. The marital situation, marrying young, having chest early, the other boys, the years passing, Nikki and her paralegal work, her abilities? David and his jobs? Meeting Miss Staples, the two weeks job for clearing the rubbish?
6. David, the separation, the psychological effect? The episode of the to meeting, sitting in the truck, a dating night? Nicky and her concern about the children?
7. Jess, picked up by her father, her angers and taunts? And surly behaviour, at home, with the boys? The visits to the supermarket and shopping? The contrast with the three boys, their age, young, playing together, devotion to their father? The outings with him, the games?
8. David, life in the town, friends, Jeremy, at the diner, at the supermarket?
9. David and the meeting with Derek, his strong stances, wanting to intervene, the discussions in the street, sending Nikki away, to get the children, Derek and his bashing David, the consequences, his rage in the truck, driving recklessly?
10. The later scenes, at the supermarket, his bandages?
11. The ending, reconciliation, David and his coping with the situation, Nikki and the boyfriend, the children?
12. A small town glimpse of a broken down marriage?

TOGETHER, TOGETHER

US, 2021, 90 minutes, Colour.

Patti Harrison, Ed Helms, Rosalind Chao, Nora Dunn, Fred Melamed, Tig Notaro, Julio Torres, Sufe Bradshaw.

Directed by Nikole Beckwith.

The title is a nice play on words, whether a couple is really together or just together together.

This is a brief film about surrogacy. The film opens with a fortysomething, Matt (Ed Helms) interviewing a young woman in her mid-20s, Anna (an effective presence from Patti Harrison).

The pair come to an agreement about the surrogacy of his child, making a contract. The film is then divided into three sections, for each trimester.

The film’s focus on Matt is that he is growing ever more continually anxious, visiting his brother with his family, his parents, his memories of failed relationships. He accompanies Anna in all kinds of activities, especially to the doctor. He then becomes very attached to her, even inviting her to stay with him.

On the other hand, and it begins as somewhat detached, bad memories of pregnancy and adoption in the past. She is alienated from her family. She works in a diner – with Matt often turning up. She does not want to know the babies gender (Matt does) but she welcomes the interviews with the counsellor, played by Teague Notaro, and is continually challenged by the hardheaded notice at the hospital.

While she appreciates mats concern, even going to stay with him for some time, she is rather insistent on establishing boundaries, something which Matt finds very difficult.

As the film comes to an end, the birth of the baby, the audience is left not knowing the gender of the child, what will be and his response now that the child is born, the effect of the surrogacy experience, and what Matt will do caring for the child.

1. The tone of the title? Father and mother of the child? Surrogacy? Togetherness?
2. The San Francisco settings, homes and apartments, workplaces, hospitals, birthing centres, donors? Atmosphere? The musical score?
3. Introducing Matt and Anna, the interview, the conditions, surrogacy, Matt and his former partner, separated, wanting a family, in his 40s? Anna, teenage pregnancy, giving up the baby for adoption, cut off by her parents? Age 26? Reasons for the surrogacy?
4. The three sections of the film, for each trimester? The development of the pregnancy, preparations for the birth? Matt and his continued concern?
5. The screenplay, the range of uncertain conversations, hesitance, problems, questions? The couple gradually getting to know each other, the nature of friendship, the nature of their love, as manifested throughout the surrogacy?
6. Matt, age, competence, uncertainties? Visiting his brother and the children? His mother forever criticising him? Father, stepfather? His memories of his parents? The visit to the shower? The contrast with Anna, news of her sister, the later phone call, meeting the friend from high school and information getting around? Cut off from her parents, a phone call?
7. The importance of the scenes with the doctor, her listening to each of them, assessing what was happening, advice? The return visits? The visits to the surgery, the ultrasounds, the support of the doctor? The nurse, her listening, not able to comment, privately giving her views, assessments, judgements, implied criticism?
8. Anna, the coffee bar, Julio and the comments? Matt’s visits? The secrecy? Julio learning the truth, his reaction to the clogs, his reaction to Matt, support of Anna?
9. Matt, the continued attention, wanting to be present, the visits, the huge toy, the visits to the shops, the cots and their costs, the discussions about the colour for the room? His books of advice on the meaning of colours? On being a parent?
10. The visits to the birthing centres, Anna, the exercises, the woman presiding, support? Matt, alone, the other couples, the exercises? The gay women and their support?
11. The effect on Anna, the months of carrying the child, the initial sexual relationship and Matt’s reaction, the effect of the discussions with the adviser, the doctors, the nurse? Accepting her bearing the child? The inevitability of giving up the child?
12. The baby shower, the friends, the gifts, the parents, and a feeling that she was excluded?
13. The gender of the child, and not wanting to know, Matt wanting to know, acceding, finding a name, calling the child Lamp temporarily?
14. Anna, staying with Matt, the effect on each of them, the continued issue of boundaries?
15. Time coming close, going to hospital, the exercises, the birth sequence, the effect on Anna, the effect on Matt?
16. The film ending, the audience not knowing the gender of the child? And speculation as to what would happen about Matt and Anna, fathering, together…?

KIMI

US, 2022, 89 minutes, Colour.

Zoe Kravitz, Byron Bowers, Devon Rattray, Rita Wilson, Erica Christensen.

Directed by Steven Soderberg.

This reviewer suddenly discovered Kimi on a streaming service and began to watch it without checking any of its background or any of its credits. It came as something of a shock, even more than a shock, to discover that the film had been directed by Steven Soderberg and that the screenplay had been written by veteran David Koepp (Jurassic Park, Mission Impossible amongst many others).

There are references to covid 19 in the screenplay. The central character often wears a mask as do other characters. This is a film made in pandemic times, small budget, generally small locations, a small cast – but amplified by some outdoor sequences.

The film opens with something of an air of mystery, an expert on IT and computer communication developments experiencing extortion. There are some moments throughout the film where there is further extortion – and, while the film ends with some explanation of this and how it affects the central character, it is treated very, very briefly.

The focus is on a young woman, Angela (played by Zoe Kravitz, Serena in The Batman). We see her interacting with the computer voice, Kimi, controlling all the operations and the apartment. Angela is gaunt, has blue hair, lives alone – although, echoes of Rear Window, she looks out of her apartment, especially to the businessman in the apartment across the street. We also notice a man in the upper window looking out at her – and he becomes integral in the final climax of the film.

Angela seems to be rather agoraphobic, even backing out of a rendezvous with the man across the street at the sandwich truck below. When he does visit, there is an aggressive sexual encounter.

The key to the film, some memories of Coppola’s The Conversation, is that Angela in her work of finding solutions to errors in computer voice answers to questions, comes across an aggressive episode, sexual assault, which she wants to report to the authorities. Her bosses demand that she does not. However, even venturing out of the apartment, she goes to an appointment with one of the authorities (played by Rita Wilson). She discusses but is unsatisfied. She is detained. Then she is pursued, abducted into a van, but street protesters rescuing her. She escapes home.

In the meantime, we are shown supervisors at their screens, not exactly explained, one might say touches of the Kafkaesque (and Soderberg did direct the film, Kafka).

There is a final confrontation, Angela using her wits, an expose of the conspiracy behind the action. Kimi is a brief film, interesting because of its writer and Director, but at times seems too enigmatic.

1. The title? The focus on developed technology, voice commands, fulfilment of orders? Kimi as the voice and obeying commands?
2. A film made during lockdown, the atmosphere of covid 19, rather empty streets, people wearing masks? Small budget, smaller locations, smaller cast? Seattle?
3. The opening with the interview of the expert, his family, the pressure on him, payments? This recurring during the film? The end, the pressure on him? The quick revelation of the conspiracy?
4. The introduction to Angela, immediate reaction, her age, gaunt, tense, the blue hair? Her apartment, interactions with Kimi? Nervy, the building repairs and her demands for silence? Her work, listening to the recorded voices, answers to questions, mistakes in grammar and vocabulary, her correcting them?
5. Looking out the window, seeing Kevin, the man across the street, the continued texting, the rendezvous, her delay in getting ready, not going out, agoraphobic? His leaving? Later texting, his coming across, the aggressive sexual activity? Later texting him, the crisis, his coming with the flowers? And the finale, the going out, meeting him at the sandwich trailer?
6. Her work, hearing the sound of the attack? The later revelation that she had been sexually attacked and the effect? The phone calls from her mother, concerned?
7. Ringing the official, making the appointment, venturing out, the discussions with the official, seeming reasonable, yet not calling the FBI, the official leaving, the delay, the texting, information about the deleting of the information? Her fears, decision to run, the men in pursuit, the corridors and staircases, out into the crowd, abducted into the van, knocking the door open, the protesters releasing her, her going home?
8. The technology background, Angela contacting her boss, the girls fighting in the background, his forbidding her to give the information? Her copy it onto the USB stick? The contact in Romania, his getting her the material? The audience seeing the surveillance of screens, the authorities, suspicious, the thugs?
9. The final confrontation, Kevin and his attempt to help, the threats, torture, Angela escaping, locking the door, commanding Kimi to turn out the lights…, going to the roof, getting the nail gun, her attack, killing the assailants, helping Kevin, ringing the police? And the man across the street arriving with the flowers?
10. The glimpse of the solution and the arrest of the initial official?
11. Angela, touch of romance, back to ordinariness?

L’EVENEMENT/  HAPPENING

France, 2021, 98 minutes, Colour.

Anamaria Vartolomei, Casey Mottet Klein, Sandrine Bonnaire, Anna Mouglalis, Pio Marmai.

Directed by Audrey Diwan.

Happening is one of the meanings of the French title, also meaning an event, or an occurrence.

The happening/event/occurrence in this film is pregnancy. And, then more specifically, abortion.

It is based on an autobiographical novel by Annie Ernaux and is set in the early 1960s, in France, in a very different period from later decades and the changes in abortion legislation.

A film on this topic would be approached in many different ways. Adamant pro-life advocates will oppose it. Those in favour of abortion rights will be in favour of it. There is also the position of being pro-life but being concerned about legislation and the abuses from what used to be referred to as “backyard abortions”. Whatever the stance, a story like this, a film like this, serves as conversation point, discussion material, dramatising the human and lived experiences of the pregnant woman and the experience of the abortion.

Which is what happens here. Anne (Anamaria Vartolomei) is in her early 20s, a top student, ambitious to go to university, living in a college dorm, visiting her parents, simple people, at home. Anne is not an entirely likeable character all, self-preoccupied, sometimes moody and petulant. She tends to dominate her friends. She tends to feel herself a bit superior. And, she enjoys the social life, out dancing, flirting.

She finds it difficult to admit to herself that she is pregnant, denying it to a friendly doctor, asking for help from a sympathetic-seeming doctor whose medication in fact strengthens the fetus. And this is where the film becomes a drama of desperation, remembering that it is the early 1960s, information not readily available,  Anne searching for knowledge in books, experimenting with primitive ways to force a miscarriage.

Eventually, the film does give some background as to how Anne became pregnant, her relationship with the young man whom she visits but who abandons her. However, a close friend at college puts her on to another friend, and the address of an abortionist – which leads to a severe screen experience of sharing the abortion with Anne.

There are further complications, harrowing and painful for Anne.

And, at the time, there were severe legal penalties for the woman undergoing abortion, for any abortionist and for those who aided and abetted. In the succeeding decades, there has been legislation abortion in many countries – although, as in the United States, there are some moves to reverse the more liberal legislation.

A women’s audience will watch the film with some empathy – and it will be a challenge for a men’s audience to watch and reflect on.

1. Based on an actual story, by the author of the book, a story of the early 1960s?
2. The title, pregnancy as an event, as a happening? Abortion as a happening?
3. The 1960s setting, homes, studies and classes, student dormitories, clubs, 60s dancing, doctors’ offices, the abortionist and her home, the rooms? Musical score?
4. Audience identification with Anne? The female point of view? Author, writer, director?
5. And story, her age, studies, intelligent, good marks, ambitions, prospects of university? At home, her loving parents, wanting the best, the simple lives? Her friends, peers, dressing to go out, dancing, flirting, talking with boys? Anne and her relationship with Jean? Other girls in the class, looking down on her?
6. The issue of pregnancy, going to the doctor, her denial, the friendly doctor, moral disapproval, refusal to act? The next doctor, the tablets, his deception, tablets for strengthening the fetus? The revelation of the truth, the friend from Bordeaux, phone calls, the later visit, his friends, telling him the truth, not supporting her?
7. Books, research, lack of knowledge, the law, prison, for the woman, for those aiding and abetting? Her attempts to miscarry?
8. Her worrying, fretting, with her parents, her mother slapping her? Later embracing her, listening to the comedy on radio? The distance from her friends? The lower marks, the confrontation with the lecturer? Prospects of failing?
9. Her choices, not wanting to keep the baby, wanting to have a successful academic life? Self-preoccupied? Moody and petulant? Her friends? Helene telling her of the affair with a married man? Brigitte is a country girl, talking about sex, simulating, prospects in life?
10. Asking help from Jean, his reluctance, seeming rejection, later contact, the address, talking with the girl and had the abortion? The issue of money, selling her books and jewellery? The friendship with the man from the fire brigade, the sexual encounter with him?
11. The phone call, making the appointment, the abortionist, her home, the rooms, equipment, hygiene? Stern personality? Urging Anne not to cry out? The procedure, the details, the pain?
12. Return home, the failure of the procedure, her pain, going back, consenting to further procedures? At home, pain, going to the bathroom, the miscarriage? Olivia, helping her, cutting the release? Anne unable to do this?
13. The discussions with the lecturer, explaining the situation bleakly, his giving her the lecture notes, her study?
14. The end, going into the exam, her prospects, her future, the long-term consequences of the abortion?

MAN OF GOD

Greece, 2021, 109 minutes, Colour.

Aris Servetalis. Alexandre Petrov, Christos Loulis, Tonia Sotiropouloou, Mickey Rourke.

Directed by Yelena Popovic.

Here is a cinematic invitation to visit the world of the Orthodox Churches.

This has been a welcome film for members of the Greek Orthodox Church. It is a Greek production, a Greek cast plus some Russians, and a cameo at the end of the film by Mickey Rourke as a paralysed patient in the hospital. Those not familiar with Orthodox Christianity will be intrigued by differences from their own experiences.

The man of God of the title is a Bishop, Nektarios, who was declared a saint in 1961.

The film opens in Alexandria in 1890, plenty of atmosphere, an introduction to Nektarios as a good man, encountering the poor, talking with Muslims. But, then we enter the world of ecclesiastical politics and this is a pervading issue throughout the film, deep effect on the life of Nektarios himself. Many want him to find a high place in the hierarchy, eventually to become the Patriarch. However, he has been denounced, out-of-favour with the authorities, accused of being a fraud. The scenes of the bishops arguing the case, their reasons for condemnation, are the familiar discussions in all aspects of politics, church and secular.

The action then moves to Athens, Nektarios, labouring under the reported suspicions, unable to be given an appointment for ministry. We see him working with the poor, living the life of the poor. In some ways, he is the image of the traditional saint, absolutely devoted entirely to God, stern, rarely smiling, self-sacrificing. Later, he will be engaged in a discussion about asceticism – and he is the model of the ascetic. He also finds that he was born in a part of Greece now seconded into the Turkish Empire, and his not being recognised as a Greek citizen.

However, we see that there is a providence in his life. He is asked to be the head of the seminary in Athens. Once again, complete dedication, certainly not always approved of by the Board of the seminary, especially one member, Christos, continually antagonistic towards Nektarios (the discussion about asceticism with him), apologising to seminarians involved in petty disputes because he has provoked anger, determined to do penance, and in another case, apologising again and offering to go on a hunger strike. When the janitor is ill and his job threatened, Nektarios cleans the toilets.

In the early 20^th century, there is another election in Alexandria, with Nektarios travelling, some wanting him elected patriarch – but the malevolent authorities continually undermine him.

In the latter part of his life, he accedes to the wishes of a group of women in Athens, the leader an earnest blind woman, who wish to be nuns. They move to the island of Aegina, building it up, living a poor life, but fulfilling their ambitions to live a community life. Again, church authorities suspicious, civic authorities sending the police to interrogate him, the mother of one of the nuns having gone to accuse him of misbehaviour – but he and the women are vindicated.

All the time, Nektarios has had the support of Kostas, deciding not to go on for priesthood, but a firm supporter of Nektarios, faithful over the years, but pleading with him not to go to the island, ultimately visiting him and concerned about him in his old age.  Nektarios’ health declines, and he dies – leading to further veneration and the declaration of his sainthood.

In many ways, severe hagiography and the portrait of an ascetic, maligned, but caring for the poor and oppressed.

1. An invitation for world audiences to enter into the world of the Orthodox Churches? For members of the churches? For Christian believers? For members of other religions? For non-believers?
2. The story based on fact, Egypt in the 1890s, Athens and the Greek islands in the 20^th century? The locations, atmosphere of Egypt, Alexandria, the city, churches and worship, meetings of the authority, the synods? The atmosphere of Athens, the city, poor areas, the seminary, authorities and their offices? The island of Aegina, rural, the sea, the building of the monastery? Authentic atmosphere? Musical score, from Orthodox liturgies enquires?
3. The story of Nektarios, as cleric, as Bishop, as slandered, living with the poor, as rector of the seminary, the clashes with the authorities, the management of the seminary, the request from the women, going to the island, establishing the convent? Old age, work, menial tasks, humble, seen as saintly? His being acknowledged as a saint in 1961?
4. The screenplay, names and dates, places, the piecemeal effect, putting together his life and struggles?
5. The audience seeing him in middle age, accused of being a fraud, misconduct? The meetings of the hierarchy, their discussions, their malevolent attitudes towards him? Fear that he would be elected as Archbishop? Campaigns against him? Poisoning the patriarch’s minds and attitude?
6. His friends, support, going to Athens? Not accepted, no livelihood, not considered a Greek citizen because of Turkish occupation, living a poor life, with the poor, his supporters?
7. The scenes of him doing good, his friends in Alexandria, words of healing? Sharing life with the poor in Athens? Saintly?
8. The request for him to go to the seminary? The nature of the seminary, the students, bickering amongst themselves, his asking for forgiveness, taking blame for provoking others’ angers? The later threat of the hunger strike? Interactions with the students?
9. The authorities, buildings, repairs? Christos and his years of interaction with Nektarios? The hostility, undermining the saint, the meetings, the discussions, religious issues? The end, a certain admiration?
10. The friendship with Kostas, the beginnings, his not wanting to be a priest, working in the seminary, the discussions with Nektarios, the friendship, support? His upset with the authorities? The issue of the monastery, not wanting him to go? Even a tantrum? Yet the continued visits, the support over the years, finally illness, death?
11. Maria, the other women, the discussions, her being blind? The request for a convent? Nektarios’ support, the island, the land, the building of the convent, the hard labour, the stones and building?
12. Hostility towards Nick Darius, his going to Alexandria for the election of the patriarch, his being edged out, the newly elected showing him? The return to Greece, on the island? The raid by the police? The accusations of the mother of the nun, testing her, vindication?
13. Age, the passing of the years, life in the convent, his illness, the paralysed man in the adjacent bed, the conversations, the healing? The final treatment, his death?
14. His reputation, veneration?

SEASONED WITH LOVE

Canada, 2021, 90 minutes, Colour.

Julia Benson, Peter Benson, Tori Barban, Kolton Stewart, Maria Inger, Emma Campbell.

Directed by Claude Desrosiers.

Yes, food, cooking, romance. And for those in the 30s and 40s. And the G classification is an indication. (And many moist eyes moments.)

This is a Canadian production but, as with so many Canadian films and telemovies, it is set in Pittsburgh and in country Pennsylvania with an excursion to New York City. The cast is Canadian, led by Julia and Peter Benson who are married in real life.

This is a film very much for audiences who enjoy television cooking programs. Here we see chefs and their helpers at work, working in the kitchen, with the vegetables, with the spices, all kinds of creations for a local Flora Fest. And, when the first batch of foods is destroyed by raccoons, there are donations from people in the town and surroundings and more cooking.

Julia Benson plays Winona, managing a bistro in Pittsburgh who gets an invitation to come to New York to audition for cooking television program. On the way, her veteran car (a gift from the partner with whom she began the bistro) breaks down and she is stranded in New Holland, Pennsylvania. And, of course, in the preparations for the Flora Fest, the main chef is struck down by illness. So, no new major plot surprises.

Winona has had some trouble on arriving in the town, an elderly tractor driver who does not seem to speak giving her a lift, then his being ticked off by the owner of the local Inn. It will take a long time to fix the car and Winona has to stay at the Inn managed by – of course, the man who ticked off the tractor driver. And he has a daughter who wants to get into MIT.

On the whole, the film is very genial, everybody, basically, being nice to everyone else and, if there is a bit of tension, there are explanations, apologies and reconciliations.

There is a nice presentation of spirit in a rural community getting together. But, there is edge, when the television producers come to the town and interview Winona, and the townspeople taken aback at what they see on the News, her interview edited to make her seem better than she was. And, then, in New York, at the audition, she realises where she really wants to be!

1. The title? Food, cooking, romance? The target middle-aged audience? And the teenage characters and their issues?
2. Pittsburgh, the bistro, the kitchen, Winona and Pearl and their work, the customer and his tasting the unexpected dish? The phone call, the invitation for Winona to come for an audition to New York, her decision? And, in honour of her friend, Annie, to drive the car?
3. The Pennsylvania countryside, the town of New Holland, the crops, the tractor driver, the old man giving Winona the lift, the encounter with Adam, acerbic, meeting Dora, the car repairs, stranded in the town, going to the Inn?
4. The Flora Fest, Winona learning the history, Adam’s ancestor, the spirit, touch, tulips, flowers, the importance of food? The team for the food, Millie and her illness, her recipes? The crisis, the approach to Winona? Winona cooking the fish, the taste? Her agreeing?
5. Adam, widower, bringing up Katrina? Her studies, secret, application to MIT, being accepted? Talking with Winona, telling her father, his joy and acceptance?
6. Katrina helping with the cooking, Harry and his talents, Dora his mother, the collaboration in the preparation for the meal, recipes, the food, the work in the kitchen, the cooking, the chips?
7. Katrina, wanting Winona to stay? The store door open, the raccoons? Having to start again?
8. The meeting, discussions, plans, the food gifts from the people, going to see the old man, his talking, the venison, the double yolk eggs? The plans, the menu, the night before, Winona and the desert, with Adam?
9. The day of the Fest, the preparations of the cooking, the tables, the crowds, gathering, eating, satisfaction?
10. The television company, sending the crew, filming, the interview with Winona, everybody gathering for the news, the editing and the disgusted reaction? Even Adam? Talking with Katrina, Katrina having listened in, explaining the truth?
11. To New York, the audition, the challenge to Winona, valuing relationship rather than impersonal television success? Adam going to New York, the apology, the plans for the future, working in new Holland? Marriage?

SONIC THE HEDGEHOG 2

US, 2022, 116 minutes, Colour.

Voices of: Ben Schwartz, Idris Elba, Colleen O'Shanussy. Jim Carrey, James Marsden, Tika Sumpter, Natasha Rothwell, Shemar Moore, Adam Pally, Lee Majdoub.

Directed by Jeff Fowler.

There’s nothing like a video game popularity, especially amongst younger players (and their parents?) To help towards decisions to make feature films. The first Sonic the Hedgehog film was popular and a commercial success. And, it would seem, that this sequel will easily follow in its footsteps – and, at the end, all kinds of prospects for further Sonic adventures.

Sonic himself seems the least likely of world heroes, so it just goes to show! Small, blue, like a child, but with that capacity for absolute fast motion. And, there is a nice sheriff and his wife, James Marsden and Tika Sumpter, already having proved their niceness and care for Sonic, ready to join in these adventures as well.

Which means then that the screenplay offers all kinds of entertainment for the younger audiences Sonic himself, a friend, Tails, a little fox with two tails, and an echidna from outer space, Knuckles, with whom there will be an ultimate reconciliation and plans for further adventures.

But, in the meantime, the arch-villain from the first film, Dr Robotnik, has been stranded on a mushroom planet in outer space. He is the most dastardly of the dastardly, a huge moustache, severe eyes, dressed in pilot’s uniform. And, we first met him in the first film, in the form of Jim Carrey. For older generations this is an opportunity to see the Jim Carrey of old, all eccentric mannerisms and grimaces, oddball dialogue which it would seem he wrote himself.

The whole point of the adventure this time is that there is an emerald that gives power over the world, Dr Robotnik searching for it, Knuckles wanting it for better purposes, and It entrusted by the wise owl to Sonic to find it and preserve it.

So, a lot of animated adventures to please the young audience, enough knockabout comedy and eccentric characters to entertain the youngest. And, to keep the adult audience attention, there is comedy with those characters, especially a wedding in Hawaii which goes disastrously awry.

The climax, Dr Robotnik with the emerald, able to build a gigantic monstrosity which he inhabits, ready to crush anyone in its path, animated characters or humans, but defeated by the team work of the trio of Knuckles, Tails and Sonic. And there is time out for heartfelt talks and advice about responsibility, helping others, teamwork.

1. The popularity of the video games? The first film? The prospect of more adventures?
2. The blend of animated characters with the live-action? The story going beyond the limits of realism?
3. The style of animation, for Sonic, for Knuckles, for Tails? Characters, personalities, appearance? Voices? And interacting with the adult characters?
4. The adult characters, Dr Robotnik and the extreme caricature? The contrast with Tom, Maddie, Rachel and Randall, the sheriff, even Dr Robotnik’s assistant, Stone?
5. This adventure presupposing the first film? Establishing the characters and their interactions? Establishing Dr Robotnik as a Dr Evil?
6. Dr Robotnik, exiled on the planet, his plans to escape, the opening and the elaborate setup of the mushrooms and stones, finding the drink? His character, manner, Jim Carrey’s style? The arrival of Knuckles, the pretended collaboration, the piece punch? Leaving and returning to earth? Dr Robotnik, his quest, pursuit of Sonic? The special powers? The greed for the emerald?
7. Sonic, young, enjoying life, Tom and Maddie going to the wedding, their being his parents? The mayhem at home, clearing it up? The owl and the vision? The map, the goal?
8. Tail, two tails, arriving, the reputation of Sonic, Tail and the vehicle, all kinds of adjuncts?
9. The quest, the ring and travel, Siberia, lost, the encounter with the Russians, the dancing competition? The travel, two Hawaii, the disaster at the wedding? Tom and the wrong ring?
10. Tom and Maddie, going to the wedding, Rachel and Randall, Rachel wary of Tom? The ceremony, the rings, the interruption, the chaos, the various agents, Randall revealed as an agent, the setup of the wedding, the head agent? Maddie and Rachel and their plotting?
11. The action in the ocean, the manifestation of the emerald, Dr Robotnik and Knuckles hastening towards the island, finding the emerald? Dr Robotnik taking possession, getting rid of Knuckles?
12. Sonic, Tail, getting to the island, sonic and his fear of water and drowning, the speed to the island, the encounter with Knuckles, each saving the other, collaborating?
13. Dr Robotnik, the power, creating the huge creature, monster? Inside and miming the movements? The comments? Destruction in the town? His work with Stone, the sheriff suspicious about the diner shut? Dr Robotnik and the headquarters and equipment?
14. Teamwork, the trio, working together, the plan to bring down the monster? Sonic as the destruction, Knuckles and the attack, tail and the various manoeuvres?
15. Success, Dr Robotnik failing, Sonic finding new friends, prospects? Tom and Maddie as parents?
16. In the morals throughout the film, especially about responsibility and helping others, teamwork?

CARBON, THE UNAUTHORISED BIOGRAPHY

Australia/Canada, 2021, 89 minutes, Colour.

Narrated by Sarah Snook.

Directed by Daniella Ortega, Niobe Thompson.

As indicated by the title, this is a documentary about Carbon. However, it is highly personalised, Carbon telling the personal story.

It is difficult to gauge exactly for whom this documentary has been made, an Australian-Canadian collaboration, locations in each country, scientific representatives as well as ordinary people giving their opinions. Not for scientists, it is aimed for an audience not so well informed about science, carbon, the evolution of carbon and its place in the universe and in our world. For the adult audience there is a huge demand/test in so far as the filmmakers decided to personify Carbon as feminine speaking her story through the voice of Australian actress, Sarah Snook. For some audiences, this is all rather twee and, for many, off-putting.

Which means that the film may have more of a chance with younger audiences who may accept the feminine Carbon and find a lot of information accessible through images and narration.

In fact, most of the content of the film is quite serious. There is detailed explanation of the origins of Carbon, images of the big bang and the millennia following, the development of the planets, Carbon and stars, the role of the evolutionary processes. All visually striking.

Then there are explanations of Carbon on Earth, Carbon mixing with other elements, leading to its place within human beings – we live in a Carbon world.

Throughout the film there are quite a number of talking heads, various science experts, some of them highly enthusiastic in their explanations. There are also rather more ordinary characters, reflecting on our situation, the place of Carbon, the place of coal, climate change…

And there is a very human framework with a family, Canadian, father and daughter and pregnant mother – leading to a birth sequence at the end, and the continued reminder of the presence of Carbon in ourselves.

Which means then that the screenplay is asking us to forgive Carbon. Screenplay asking us also to respect Carbon and its/her place but not to exploit it.

One irritated viewer commented that the final part of the film is “Greenwashing”, advocating renewables, focusing on sun and wind, images of solar panels, wind sources – but, the objector criticising the enthusiast for renewables (who runs a company in Australia) for not acknowledging the role of coal in the production of wind farms. An important point to consider – but not to undermine the development of renewables.

So, perhaps an audience one evening watching this documentary on television or, more probably, teachers using it as an education aid in schools.

MORBIUS

US, 2022, 104 minutes, Colour.

Jared Leto, Matt Smith, Adria Arjona, Jared Harris, Tyrese Gibson, Al Madrigal, Michael Keaton.

Directed by Daniel Espinosa.

For this reviewer, quite a surprise. With the early part of the story and treatment, he found that he was enjoying the film, not what he was expecting. In fact, no reading of the Marvel Comics, no knowledge of who Morbius was – except seeing the trailer a number of times and then discovering that it was 100% misleading, especially about the character of Michael Morbius himself.

By way of extra review, this reviewer sat behind four 14-year-olds in the cinema. Those who scoff at Marvel Comics and their range of movies sometimes remark that they were written for 12-14-year-olds. And, judging by this group in the cinema, they were reaching their mark! And, momentarily embarrassingly, they were reaching the reviewer. Which led to the reflection that material for 12-14-year-olds is good for them but why can’t we enjoy at least some of them as well! A further compliment to the boys was that one of them insisted they take all their litter out with them after the film – and an opportunity to ask him whether he enjoyed the film. Yes, he said, it was the second time he had seen it (and this was the morning of its third day of release!).

So, a sobering experience with a real audience. The running time is brief compared with other Marvel epics, delivering what it intends, even though critics might declare that is not what it ought not to be delivering!

The action opens in Costa Rica, Morbius, with walking sticks, confronting a huge cave of bats and seemingly overwhelmed by them. Then a return to Greece, 25 years earlier, Michael in a clinic cared for by a sympathetic medic, Dr Nicholas (Jared Harris). A young patient is brought in, Lucian, whom Michael name is Milo because of the succession of boys in the adjacent bed who have passed through while Michael has been there. They become friendly. And Michael is clever, fixing an elaborate machine with a ballpoint pen and Dr Nicholas recommending him for further studies and a scholarship. So, the human touch after the episode with the bats.

With the adult Michael, he is awarded the Nobel Prize and rejecting it, stating that his attempts so far to find a cure for his condition have been failures. He works in a laboratory, financed by the adult Milo (Matt Smith), collaborating with a young doctor, Martin Bancroft (Adria Arjona). Contrary to the impressions created by the trailer, Dr Michael Morbius is actually a man of integrity, seriously involved in his work. However, during an experiment on a boat in international waters, he succeeds in his experiment but with dangerous consequences.

This is where the film turns into a variation on the Dr Frankenstein theme, wariness of undisciplined scientifical and medical experimentation, and the Frankenstein monster this time the doctor himself – and, as the action progresses, the real villain is a transformed Milo.

And, of course, with the bats who survive on blood, Morbius is transformed by his cure to a vampiric condition, there are many Dracula moments.

With a death in a hospital, as well as the deaths of all the crew on the mysterious boat, there are police investigations, media reports and the audience seeing more and more of Milo and his ambitions.

Which means then that Dr Morbius is a kind of Bruce Wayne figure, wanting the good, but transforming into a character beyond, this time with superpowers of transformation in flight, fangs and gore.

Jared Leto is Morbius and, as mentioned, far more sympathetic and with integrity than initially thought. Despite his transformations, he wants what is best and is prepared to suffer consequences. And, during the final credits, there are two indications of what some of the consequences might be, the introduction of an oddball character seen in prison, Andrew Toomes (for those in the know, Vulture) then transforming himself and confronting Morbius, a character played by Michael Keaton. So, in the future …

1. The popularity of Marvel comics? Or film adaptations? The role of Dr Michael Morbius?
2. The Marvel production values, the narrative, the hero, the villain, superpowers, struggle between good and evil, deaths and injuries, confrontations?
3. The opening, Costa Rica, the exotic scenery, the cave of the bats, the helicopter, crew, Dr Morbius, his walking sticks, his appearance, confronting the bats, overwhelmed?
4. The return to Greece, 25 years earlier, Michael and his illness, the institution, the mockery of the boys outside, Nicholas and his kindness, Lucian and his arrival, his illness, talking with Michael, their friendship, Michael clever, fixing the machine with a ballpoint pen, prospect of scholarship? His making of the paper characters, writing the letter, Lucian called Milo after all the boys in that bed, the letter outside, his being bashed by the boys?
5. The present, the Nobel Prize, Michael rejecting it, considering his experiments failures? His work in the laboratory, with the bats, the variety of experiments with the mice? Seeming failure, then success?
6. Martine Bancroft, work with Michael, the attraction, on the boat, concussion, hospital, interrogation by the agents, at the hospital, keeping the secrecy, the encounter with Michael on the bus, going to the laboratory, bringing him material, confronted by Milo?
7. The experiment on the boat, the bats, Michael transformed, the cure, the need for blood? The vampiric transformation? Attacking all the men on the boat? The boat stranded, Martine rescued, his disappearance?
8. The two agents, Stroud as serious, Madrigal and his remarks, style of interrogation?
9. Michael, returning to the laboratory, interrogations by the police? His need for blood, his timing the space between taking in the blood, meeting Martine, getting the suppliers, with Martine in the diner, seeing the thugs, following them, their drug laboratory, injuring the hands of the boss, the others fleeing, is using the laboratory for his experiments? Martine helping him?
10. The adult Milo, wealthy, living in luxury, financing all the experiments, the meetings with Michael, financing the boat in international waters? Milo, his asking for the cure, for the blood? Is Secretly taking the cure and blood? The death of the nurse in the corridor, suspicions on Michael? Milo, healthy, relishing it, and the lust for killing, the various confrontations? Enjoying the media publicity? The meeting with Dr Nicholas, the confrontation, killing him, Dr Nicholas warning Michael?
11. Michael, becoming more desperate, arrested, in the cell, interrogated, Milo’s visit?
12. Michael free, the pursuit of Milo, the taunts, the breaking of the friendship, the flights (reminiscent of Spiderman), the death of Milo?
13. Michael, integrity, accepting the consequences?
14. The introduction of the character of Adrian Toomes, Michael Keaton, in the cell, the plane, the transformation, confrontation with Michael? The future?