THE LAST LETTER FROM YOUR LOVER

UK, 2021, 110 minutes, Colour.

Shailene Woodley, Joe Alwyn, Felicity Jones, Callum Turner, Nabhaan Rizwan, Diana Kent, Ben Cross.

Directed by Augustine Frizzell.

Here is a romantic drama whose success will depend on audience susceptibilities to romantic dramas. Many will identify with the characters, their crises, the difficulties in resolving the crises – over a long period. Others may not identify with the characters, be not particularly sympathetic to their crises, find the drama somewhat overblown.

In fact, the action of the film takes place in two quite different periods. The initial action takes place in London in 1965, recreating the atmosphere of the times, costumes and decor, the UK in a period of 1960s transition while many of the customs of class are still dominant. Then there is a second period, in the 2010 is, a media investigation about the lovers of the 1960s.

While this is an American production, the settings are very British.

Shaving Woodley is the star of the film, an American who has left the United States, has married a British industrialist. She lives are very comfortable, fashionable life, rather spoilt. And, as we see at social events, she is dominated by her husband (Joe Alwyn). Initially, she is not particularly impressed by one of her husband’s associates, Anthony (Callum Turner), drinking, resentful. However, they encounter one another again and… What we might expect.

Felicity Jones is Ellie, the central character in the 2010 is, a journalist, getting information about Jennifer, finding a cache of letters in an archive, with a mysterious signature Boot. Ellie is rather a free spirit, a touch angry with the prim and proper Guardian of the archives, Rory (). The film puts is in the mood to expect that there will be some attachment between them…

So, the action of the film moves from one era to another, leading to disappointment in the 1960s, some moments of reprieve in 1969, but we remember the tone of the title, the last letter.

What could happen then in the 2010 is? Ellie discovering where Jennifer is? Where Anthony is? Could there be some resolution? If you are a fan of romantic dramas, you will probably want to know, probably want to see the film.

1. The title? Expectations? Already? Romance? Sadness?
2. The London settings, the 1960s, mansions, restaurants, fashion? Nightclubs and music? Visits to Europe, resorts, the coast? The contrast with the 21^st-century, busy streets, traffic, buildings, newspaper offices, homes, archives…? The musical score?
3. The two timeframes, the narrative of 1965? The postscript of 1969? The 21^st-century? The bond of the letters? The research? Ellie and motivation? Rory helping? The visits, the letters, bringing the two together?
4. Jennifer’s story, American, marrying Lawrence, the formal marriage, his business interests, socials, dinners, dominating his wife? The holidays? The encounter with Anthony O’ Hare? His manner, drinking, comments? His letter of apology? The effect on Jennifer? The brutal nature of her marriage? The meetings with Anthony, his story, separation, his child, falling in love, the relationship? Anthony and the decision to take the New York position, inviting Jennifer, her hesitation, her family, reputation? The range of letters, the postbox? His nickname, Boot? Waiting at Marylebone station? Jennifer’s decision, the taxi, the hurry, the crash?
5. Jennifer, the aftermath of the crash, loss of memory, Lawrence hiding her letter in his drawer, seeing the diary entries, Alberto’s restaurant and visiting, the postbox? Finding the letters? The letter in her husband’s drawer? The indication that Anthony had died?
6. 1969, the chance encounter in the park, bonding, the relationship, the separation?
7. Ellie, journalist, with men, at the office, the articles, searching the archives, the encounters with Rory, his being very literal, email appointments, his eventually helping, the finding of the letters, continuing with the letters? The voice-over of the letters and the images of the writing?
8. Rory, Asian background, studies, work, helping Ellie, his birthday, the party, the night together, her leaving, his texting, his concern, Ellie neglecting? Her casual attitude?
9. The Post Office, the box, the name, finding the address, writing the letter, the negative response? The clue about Anthony, tracking him down? Visiting him, the conversation, his memories, the letters and her giving them to him? The encounter with Jennifer, on the street, talking with her, her version of the past?
10. The final letter, the invitation to Jennifer to meet in the park, Rory and Ellie watching, the two coming together? The alternate – had she not had the crash, on the train with Anthony? The final image – and the touch of tears?

THE SECOND CIVIL WAR

US, 1997, 97 minutes, Colour.

Bridges, Joanna Cassidy, Phil Hartman, James Earl Jones, James Coburn, Dan Hedaya, Elizabeth Peña, Denis Leary, Ron Perlman, Kevin Dunn, Brian Keith, Kevin Mc Carthy, Dick Miller, William Schallert, Catherine Lloyd Burns, Jerry Hardin, Hank Stratton, Robert Picardo, Roger Corman, Rance Howard.

Directed by Joe Dante.

One of the several excellent HBO movies made for cinemas and television during the 1990s and into the 2000s. Many of them focused on aspect of American politics, like Path to War, LBJ and Vietnam. However, it was said that HBO did not promote this film after its initial release. But, in later years it became available and well praised. Those intending to watch had to check what this Civil War actually was.

Like the other HBO films, there is a vast expert cast of veteran performers. The screenplay is both serious and often laugh-out-loud funny, by Canadian Martyn Burke. And, of all directors, Joe Dante - whom we remember especially from his Gremlins films. The screenplay is full of satirical targeting at key American issues. The film shows political aspects of the 1990s as well as a frantic television news room, mindful of CNN. The film was released in the Clinton era (and Beau Bridges secessionist Governor of Idaho reminds audiences of philandering leaders). There were issues of migration (here Pakistani orphans after a nuclear disaster), preserving the American population from these inroads, the American dream.

The opening declares that the film is set in the near future, three days when Idaho, full of angry militia types, confronted the rest of the United States well, not exactly, because more and more states, even the Chinese governor of Rhode Island resenting inroads of Chinese migration, began to support Idaho. Borders, military buildup on each side, past rival generals reminiscing about old grudges (and appearing on television as if they were dignified in negotiating). A dithering President, cabinet members, a public relations expert (who forbade the L word, lobbyist), advising the president to be a hawkish Teddy Roosevelt, statesman like FDR, aggressive like Truman, dignified like Eisenhower… And the deadline undermined by a climactic episode of All My Children which the whole of the nation would be watching at the moment of the exploration of the timetable.

But, the focus is the media, CNN-like, frantic boss, wanting ratings, international and local reporters (and some funny shenanigans a touch reminiscent of M*A*S*H), but a dignified anchor-presence with James Earl Jones, political stances and voice-over.

This film was very relevant in 1997. BUT… Watching in later decades – American and the world have lived through most of the screenplay from the 2016 presidential campaign to Donald Trump’s defeat in 2020. As audience watch the film now, they realise how prescient it was, and, as audiences laugh with and at the comedy, they might wonder how the United States and the rest of the world actually lived through the turmoil, the divisions, the sloganeering, the whims of the President, and, gasped in disbelief, with the January 6, 2021 invasion of the Capitol by the militia and rabid types which had been sent up here .

1. A film of 1997? The political issues of the 1990s, the American dream, the Clinton administration?
2. The film as satire, prescient, in the light of subsequent history, 9/11, the war on terrorism, the Trump years? (And the scenario being fulfilled in the Trump era?)
3. The political satire, the American president, cabinet, advisers, public relations, the heritage of previous presidents and their stances, Hawks, doves, re-elections, campaigning, television appearances, the public response, members of Congress?
4. The media satire, the parallel with CNN, the character of Mel Burgess, in charge, hands-on with everything, rallying the troops, urging them on, 24 hours a day and beyond, frantic, the links in Pakistan, attitude towards the orphans and their arriving in prime time, no matter what the difficulties on board, the connection with Christina in Boise, wanting sequences with the governor, Jim Kalla in Washington? Vinnie Franco on the Utah-Idaho border? Wanting everything instantly? Impatient of technical difficulties? The hosts of the news, keeping their cool, bland and his suggestions, Helen Newman and her growing desperation, reaction on screen? The various stances and points of view, the right wing staff member, the clash with Alan, more left-wing? Jim and his being neutral, a reporter, his age, experience, trying to keep a balance, his Jewish wife and her illness, going home? The expert, neglected, his theories and graphs, the explanations? Strategies for the television studio?
5. The Pakistani orphan situation, India and Pakistan and the nuclear conflict, the devastation, the rounding up of the orphans, bringing them to the United States, to Idaho? The staff on the ground, Amelia Sims, her domination, telling people off, on the plane, on the border? The associate on the plane, the behaviour of the children, let loose, the smell…?
6. Idaho, the background of its being right wing, the armed militias, narrow attitudes? The governor, refusing to accept the orphans, closing the border, calling in the militias and the National Guard, and his preoccupation with himself, his liaison with Christina, his reliance on Jimmy Cannon as his aide, fixing everything, his discussions with Christina, her reactions, as a reporter, in love, but her wanting to be a mother, her being sick, the irony of her pregnancy, the governor and his delight, calling his son one Pablo (and memories of Pope John Paul II)? His neglect of his wife and her phone calls, getting aids to do the shopping? The jingoistic attitudes?
7. On the border, the two generals, their past rivalries, the weight, bets, reputation? Jingoism? The television images and their being interpreted as peacemaking! The battle sequences? The soldiers, Vinnie interviewing them, the dangers, the tanks, his wanting to leave, the pressure on him to stay, his photographers? The shootout and the devastation?
8. The arrival of the orphans of the border, Amelia and are wanting to take charge?
9. The character of the PR man, having a word for everything, not wanting to be called a lobbyist, shrewd, campaigning, quotations from past presidents, the writers (multinational) and their coming up with the quotation from Eisenhower? The visuals of Eisenhower? The aggression of Truman, statements if of Roosevelt? (And Teddy Roosevelt and Cuba?)
10. The message about the governor’s speech, the governor abandoning the campaign, reconciliation with Christina? That he was to give a speech about secession? The decision by the White House, the aggression, the devastation? And the discovery that the governor had meant was succession, about who would take over from him?
11. The satire on the American public, soap operas, the climax episode of All My Children, limiting the three day deadline, and the final comment about the public watching the episode and the top ratings?

THE CLOVEHITCH KILLER

US, 2018, 109 minutes, Colour.

Dylan McDermott, Charlie Plummer, Samantha Mathis, Madisen Beatty, Lance Chantiles Wertz, Jonathan K.Reeves.

Directed by Duncan Skiles.

Small-town America. There had been a history of serial killings but none for the last 10 years. Now another.

This is a very middle American small town, emphasis on the home, emphasis on church and religious beliefs, emphasis on school, emphasis on Scouting organisations and leadership. The father of the family, Don (Dylan McDermott), is something of a charismatic leader. He seems quite charming at home, with his wife played by Samantha Mathis, affirming his son, played by Charlie Plummer. There is also a young daughter.

The film shows Don in action, especially with the troops, especially with Tyler, his son. There is also an uncle in the family, Don’s brother, but he was involved in an accident 10 years earlier. Obviously, suspicions.

The audience and realises that Don is probably the serial killer. Tyler becomes curious about his father, looks and the scrawl crawlspace under the house, finds that his father has a hidden cache of bondage magazines. Tyler makes a connection with an eccentric fellow student at school, Cassie (Madison Beatty) who works with him in investigating what is happening.

The screenplay does a kind of Rashomon thing at the end of the film, showing events from the perspective of Don, then showing them from the perspective of Tyler and Cassie. The emphasis on the father-son relationship is dramatic at the end when Tyler gives a speech in honour of his father.

Some of the theory psychological moments especially as the portrait of Don develops.

1. The title? Expectations? Audience interest in serial killers? Their stories? Psychology?
2. The American small town, homes, churches and religious beliefs, Scouting organisations and leadership? School? The musical score?
3. The focus on the family, Don and his leadership, father, husband, the leadership of the group, the scouting tradition, flags and badges, ceremonial? The youngsters and their loyalty? Home life, cheerful?
4. The news of the serial killers, the number of murders, stopping after 10 years? The ceremonial to remember the dead?
5. Tyler, his age, quiet and introverted, loyal to his father? Friendship with Billy? Camp for leadership? His father not having the money? Comments on Kassi, his curiosity, following her, the discussions about the killings? Going to the house, the former secretary and her archives on the case? The access to the material? Tyler and Kassi working together, more information, speculation? Tyler lying to his mother about the job? His father’s talk with him, inviting Kassi to the meal?
6. Audience suspicions about Don? About Uncle Rudy, his accident, paraplegic, silent, the outings, the children singing at the home? The visits to church, the role of the pastor?
7. The locked shed, Tyler investigating, under the floor, the bondage magazines? His later going to the crawlspace, the further material, the box of driving licenses and other material? Talking with his father, the decision to burn this material? Don continuing to lie?
8. Sending Tyler to camp, urging his wife and daughter to go to stay with the grandmother? Don on his own, allowing his feelings to take over, the cross-dressing, following the woman from the supermarket, the home invasion, masked, bank robber, tying her up, his continued talk, the torture, ready to kill her?
9. The shift of emphasis, the alternate perspective, Tyler not going to camp, collaborating with Kassi? Following his father, seeing him at the supermarket, under the bed, the cross-dressing? Kassi arriving and the discussion about the photo? The following his father to the house, Tyler with the rifle, the confrontation with his father, his father trying to kill him, Kassi hitting Don?
10. The solution, Don dead, the burial? No information about the woman victim?
11. The final ceremony, Tyler speaking, tribute to his father, yet the crosscutting to the burial of his body?
12. Serial killers, sinister, ordinary in the home, the effect on the children? The sinister aspect of Tyler and his speech and the reality?

KUESSIPAN

Canada, 2019, 117 minutes, Colour.

Sharon Ishpatao Fontaine, Yamie Gregoire, Etienne Galloy, Douglas Gregoire, Cedric Ambroise.

Directed by Myriam Verreault.

A French-Canadian production, the characters belonging to an Innu village and speaking the Innu language.

There is a prologue showing the friendship between two young girls with the village. Then the action moves to their teen years, one of them rather enterprising, poetic, wanting to go to Québec to study. The other has become entangled in relationships, especially towards a violent partner, and caring for a child. There are some connections between the two friends but there are also moments of alienation.

The film shows aspects of life in the village in some detail, especially from the point of view of the enterprising young woman. She meets a young man, white, and they share a number of interests, especially in studies and further education. This contrasts then with the domestic upheaval for her friend.

The film highlights disappointments in the Innu community, bonding and sense of responsibility within a family, especially after a death. There are issues of ambitions and disappointments.

1. The title, the Innu language, following on?
2. The Innu setting, the village, the reserve, the community, homes, centres? The language? The musical score? The people, native background, indigenous, the perceptions that colonialist attitudes wanted their land? Resentment and prejudice?
3. Mikuan and Shaniss, the opening, the two young girls, the fish, homes, parents, bonding, Shaniss taken to the home, Mikuan and her sadness? The basis for the long-term friendship?
4. Years passing? The film’s focus on Mikuan, her age, appearance, joyful spirit, within the community, bonding with her parents, her father and hunting, at home, her brother and sport? Her ambitions, wanting to study, going to the creative writing weekend, exhilarated? Her own poems and the voice-over? The incident in the bar, Greg, Francis, the clash, the impending court case? Prejudice and attitudes?
5. Mikuan and Francis, talking, sharing, poetry, ambitions? The outings together? In the hut, measuring his height on the beam? The sexual attraction, the encounter? The bonding between the two? Mikuan and her wanting to go to Québec, and Francis to go with her? Inviting him to the family meal, the welcome, her brother playing the guitar? Shaniss and her prejudice against Francis?
6. Shaniss, the relationship with Greg, abusive? The baby? Feeling hurt by Mikuan and her relationship with Francis? The court case? Greg, abusive again, hiding from the police? His arrest? Shani’s and the baby, going to the abused women shelter? Relying on Mikuan?
7. Francis, breaking off with Mikuan, her being hurt? His reasons? Prejudices? Her anchor, getting the rifle, going to the hut, shooting the bed?
8. The issue of finance, her brother and sport, her going to study in Québec? The sadness of the accident, the death, lying in state, the funeral?
9. Shaniss, the shelter, not wanting to stay? Relying on Mikuan, the future, her filling farewelling Mikuan, Mikuan and the prospects for her future?

FEAR STREET PART THREE, 1666.

US, 2021, 114 minutes, Colour.

Kiana Madeira, Olivia Scott Welch, Ashley Zuckerman, Gillian Jacobs, Elizabeth Scopel, Benjamin FloresJr, Fred Hechinger, Sadie Sink, Michael Chandler.

Directed by Leigh Janiak.

This third part in the trilogy takes up where Part Two finished, which, in turn, had taken up where Part One finished. This means that the whole focus is on 1994 and the episodes in 1978 and 1666 are flashbacks. After one hour into this film, with its recreation of the village and its superstitions and fears in 1666, announces Part Two, Fear Street 1994.

Deena and Josh have sought out the advice of C. Berman who has told them the story of 1978. Now Deena has visions of the past. In terms of audience interest, the younger audiences probably prefer the slasher aspects of the first two parts. Older audiences, with memories of such stories as The Crucible, may find the first part and its recreation of 1666 much more interesting.

The main stars still appear as themselves but, in 1666, take on the characters of the period, especially Deena becoming Sarah Fier, with the chief of police, Goode, becoming Solomon Goode in the past.

The film pays great attention to the recreation of the village and the period, isolated, the houses, the assembly hall and church, the mysterious trees out in the woods, mysterious huts, and basements and sinister tunnels underneath the town.

While the audience will be expecting to see the story of Sarah Fier, who is played by Kiana Madeira, identifying Deena with Sarah, there are twists in the plot. The townspeople are superstitious with the witches, are easily stirred against them. There are sinister goings on with the Minister standing in his pulpit his eyes gouged and members of the congregation similarly eye-gouged. There are rabble rousers amongst the population. And there is a mysterious widow who is found dead. The lesbian theme is also to the fore, Sarah and her attraction towards another girl in the town, Hannah. They have a rendezvous in the woods.

Sarah relies on the town leader, Solomon Goode, who stands by her, but is eventually revealed as the arch-villain, killing enemies, reading the book of curses, retiring to the basement and tunnels where he does the incantations, especially in choosing killers and their names being scratched on the wall. He leads the populace against Sarah and Hannah, their being condemned, but Sarah taking the full blame with Hannah released. Sarah is hanged.

With the return to 1994, Deena and Josh, with the help of C. Berman, discover the truth, devise a plan to confront Nick Goode, which involves a set up in the mall, spraypaint, guns, the resurrection of other killers and their being sprayed, their turning against each other, action in the mall, but Deena going down to the tunnels below to confront and destroy Nick Goode. Ultimately, she does, and the names of the killers vanish from the walls.

The film and the trilogy portray the mayhem but also trace back the mayhem to its origins and superstitions, fears, pacts with the devil…

NITRAM

Australia, 2021, 112 minutes, Colour.

Caleb Landry Jones, Judy Davis, Anthony la Paglia, Essie Davis, Phoebe Taylor, Sean Keenan.

Directed by Justin Kurzel.

The Port Arthur massacre of 1996.

There have been a number of films about massacres, Michael Moore’s documentary, Bowling for Columbine, Gus van Sant’s fictionalising of this in Elephant, the two films about the Norwegian massacres of 2011, one from Norway, one from the US.

The decision was made for the Norwegian not to state the name of the killer, not to give him any kind of public acknowledgement (as was done with the Christchurch mosque killings). While Nitrim was in production, there were a number of protests that this film should not be made (the same happening for a projected film about Christchurch). Should such a film be made? Sensitivities to the victims and their relatives? The danger of sensationalising?

Once the film was made, screened in competition at Cannes 2021, with actor Caleb Landry Jones winning the Best Actor award, and audiences seeing the film, Nitram was generally praised. And, while Nitram is Martin spelt backwards, there was no specific naming of the Port Arthur perpetrator.

Rather, this is a cinematic exploration of a character, trying to dramatise motivations, giving a context for the events and the consequences. This is how the film is trying to challenge the audience. It is not an entertainment. It is a drama, a sad drama about a loner, a tragic drama for the consequences. This is Tasmania, the 1990s, a sense of place, the context in society, community and family for Nitram and his perspectives on life.

Which means that the screenplay observes his behaviour, listening to what he says, observing what he does, placing great emphasis on his appearance, his body language and interactions, his idiosyncrasies, and via this portrayal to enter into a disturbed mind, the mind of a loner and, as a number of people eventually say, a weirdo. And the continual question for the audience: how are we responding?

Caleb Landry Jones is originally from Texas but somehow he is able to insert himself into Tasmania. He is young, has not been is particularly successful at school, does not relate so well with his peers (attracted to a girl later claiming her as a girlfriend, attached to a surfer trying to insinuate himself as a friend) is a loner, in his room at home, out on jobs working on lawns, not a relational person. There are many important sequences at home, with his cold, dominating yet loving, demanding mother, concerned about his personality, his health, his medication. Judy Davis is, as usual, excellent in the role. By contrast, his father seems to be a weak man, loving his son, not intervening, acceding to his wife’s opinions, ultimately sick, suicidal. A different role for Anthony la Paglia.

The father has a dream of buying a property, going to visit it with his son, implanting this kind of vision in Nitram’s mind – which, when he goes to claim the property, will have devastating consequences, introducing him to killing.

The other influence in his life is a retired Opera singer (and there is frequent Gilbert and Sullivan music as background, especially from The Mikado). She is Helen. Living alone in a mansion. Wealthy, initially intrigued by Nitram and giving him a job, bonding with him, going shopping together, he flattering her, warming to her, she giving him an expensive car, giving him dreams of travel and luxury. And, with her untimely death, her money going to Nitram enabling him to do what he likes, even to extensive sequences where he buys and stores weapons. Helen is very well played by Essie Davis (the director’s wife).

There are some glimpses of mass shootings on television. However, while Nitram does go to Port Arthur with his weapons, sits and enjoys a quiet afternoon tea as he watches the tourists, families, children, all enjoying themselves, the shootings at Port Arthur are never explicitly shown.

The Port Arthur massacre was a significant episode in Australian history, making Australians aware of the potential for violence, the role of guns and the need for reform of gun law, the role of tragedy in Australian history.

The film was written by Shaun Grant, The Snowtown Murders, The True History of the Kelly Gang (and, pleasantly contrast, Penguin Bloom) for director Justin Kurtzel, who lives in Tasmania. His film career has focused on these themes, Snowtown, a version of Macbeth, graphic novel, Assassins’ Creed, The True History of the Kelly Gang and now Nitram

1. The title? Martin spelt backwards? No explicit reference to the shooting at Port Arthur?
2. The writer and the director, their credentials, Snowtown, The Kelly Gang?
3. Filming in Tasmania, authentic atmosphere, homes, the countryside, the ocean and beaches, the city, tourists at Port Arthur? The musical score and atmosphere?
4. Audience knowledge of what happened at Port Arthur? 1996? The film a quarter of a century later? Tasmanian memories, difficulties with resurrecting the memories, objections to filming such a story?
5. The significance of the massacre in Australian history? Shock? Weapons and gardens? The intervention of the government, the changing gun laws? (And the final comment about contemporary gun laws?)
6. Caleb Landry Jones as Nitram, an American, his accent? Best acting awards?
7. The challenge of portraying Nitram? His life, motivations, interactions, events, consequences?
8. The film as an attempt to dramatise the mind of the perpetrator, situate him in his place and time, in his context, his family, Tasmanian society?
9. The film is observing Nitram, his behaviour, his body language, articulate and inarticulate, interactions, idiosyncratic – and the screenplay higher these observances, entering into his disturbed mind? Loner? Considered a weirdo? Audience response to this weird character?
10. His age, the 1990s, his appearance, hair, clothes, interests, odd jobs, garden work, interested in skiing, the surfboard? Memories at school and his being taunted?
11. His family, his father, pleasant, soft, ill? The contrast with his mother, hard, loving her son, demanding, holding in her emotions? Unable to cry? The final image of her at the end of the film?
12. His going to work for Helen, Helen’s character, her career, singing, the use of Gilbert and Sullivan music and song? Her eccentricity, her age, her house, her response to Nitram, his continuing to visit, her taking him shopping, spoiling him, fostering his hopes, the possibility of international travel? The gift of the car?
13. The car, his mother’s reaction, the reckless driving, moving to stay with Helen, driving her, clowning, the crash and her death?
14. Helen leaving him the money and the house, the effect on him, freeing him from his family? The scenes of the weapons shops, collecting, the explanations?
15. His father taking him to the house, the dream of owning it? His later returning, the elderly couple, threatening them – killing them? And the impact of killing on him?
16. His fantasy world, meeting Riley, talking, her boyfriend? And then quoting her as a girlfriend? The surfing friends, going to the beach? Attempts at friendship? Compensation?
17. The final day, the film not showing him doing the shootings (but incorporating a massacre seen on television which he watched and we watch)? Sitting in the cafe, quietly having the afternoon tea, watching people? The pathos for the audience of ordinary people, tourists, families and children?
18. Getting his gun, going out, the massacre?
19. The effect of watching this character, trying to understand, seeing his actions? The disturbing film?

RED NOTICE

US, 2021, 118 minutes, Colour.

Dwayne Johnson, Ryan Reynolds, Gal Gadot, Rita Arya, Chris Diamantopoulos.

Directed by Rawson Marshall Thurber.

Looking for pacy action entertainment? Try Red Notice.

Most of us enjoy, at least sometimes, some escapist entertainment. Escape and escapism are key to Red Notice. The three central characters, either individually or in pairs or in the trio itself, spent a lot of their time escaping – and in attractively exotic locations, starting with Rome and the Castel San Angelo and its Museum, transitioning to Bali and a jungle hideaway, an episode in a remote Russian prison in the mountains, then to Valencia, even including an escape from a bull in an arena, and a trek through the Argentinian jungle to a Nazi hideaway in a deserted copper mine with extensive abandoned tunnels ready for a car chase including a 1931 Mercedes-Benz with gold plate! There is also a visit to a lavish social wedding in Cairo where Ed Sherran as his singing self has to escape the mayhem. One is inclined to add, “who could ask for anything more?”.

This kind of film used to be called a heist caper. Perhaps that’s what they are still called – and this one fulfils the definition, elaborate heist, comedy action and caper.

And the red notice? We are told at once that it is a mark from Interpol, signalling the chief suspect they are pursuing. This time it is an art thief, Nolan Booth, who prides himself on being the best in the world. And he is played by Ryan Reynolds in his affable, sometimes aw-shucks persona, quite self-centred (explaining his resentment against his police officer father), but shrewd and well-organised in his thefts and escapes. In pursuit is an FBI agent, John Hartley, interesting to see Dwayne Johnson in an authority role. But, the mysterious character who claims to their best art thief in the world is The Bishop, revealed to be a female with ecclesiastical nomination, played by Wonder Woman herself, Gal Gadot (who has not lost any of the skills she acquired way back in her Amazon days!).

The target of the thefts is a group of three eggs, alleged to belong to Cleopatra.

Booth and Hartley have to spend a long time together, sometime in hard labour in the Russian prison, other times being tortured by a diminutive greedy Spanish entrepreneur with a distinctive voice, his character called Sotto Voce, trekking through the jungle and finding the art cache, Booth whistling the Indiana Jones theme as they arrive!

The screenplay is often very witty, all kinds of quips and jokes and the writer-director, Rawson Marshall Thurber, who enjoys working with Dwayne Johnson, Central Intelligence, Skyscraper, might have called this film Bromancing the Egg. And entertaining references to a range of films, including mixing up David Attenborough’s documentaries and Richard Attenborough the palaeontologist in Jurassic Park!

Since the characters are specialists in fraud, are expert in, artistry, the screenplay has lots of misdirection of attention for the audience and plenty of twists and turns.

Entertaining.

1. Heist caper? Entertaining? Action? Comedy? And something of a travelogue?
2. The stars and their status? Taking on these characters? Interactions? Action and threats? Comic interactions?
3. The range of locations and audience delight, the variety of locations? Rome, Castel San Angelo and galleries, Bali and the jungle, the Russian mountain prison, Valencia and the prison as well as the bullring, the Argentinian jungle, the Nazi storehouse, mine and tunnels? Episodes in Egypt? The musical score?
4. The basic heist and caper, the Cleopatra eggs, the desire to possess them?
5. The introduction to Nolan Booth, Ryan Reynolds character, seemingly unassuming, seemingly naive, yet shrewd, able to play people off one another? The stealing of the egg, the pursuit, his escape to Bali, his being found, in prison with John, the parody of prison sequences, bonding, the escape, the encounter with the Bishop, plans, with John to Argentina, the hideaway, the touch of Indiana Jones? His skill at playing people off each other, seeming friendship, easy betrayals?
6. Dwayne Johnson as John Hartley, the FBI, presence in Rome, the pursuit, tracking Booth to Bali, their being taken, in the Russian prison, tough scenes, the escape, Booth’s ingenuity for keys, bricks, getting away? The encounter with the Bishop, confrontations with her, the fights? In Argentina, the hideaway, finding the egg, the escape in the Mercedes-Benz, crashes, saving the egg and the revelation that he was in partnership with the Bishop?
7. Gal Gadot as the Bishop, memories of Wonder Woman, turning up, suave, the best art thief, confrontations with the two men, continued pursuit, turning up in Argentina, the revelation of the truth, the set-ups?
8. The interlude in Egypt, the wedding, the gift of the eggs, the invasion of the FBI, Ed Sheeran and his performance?
9. The comedy lines, references to films, in jokes?
10. A good example of this kind of escapist humour – and plenty of escapes!

MACHO

Mexico, 2017, 102 minutes, Colour.

Miguel Rodarte, Renato Lopez, Mario Ivan Martinez, Aislinn Derbez, Cecilia Suarez, Maria Elena Aguilar, Manolo Cardona.

Directed by Antonio Serrano.

Everybody concerned with this project must’ve had tongues firmly in cheek throughout the writing and through the production. It is high farce.

But, as the title indicates, there are attitudes, depictions and expectations of masculinity, men and the relationship with women, and the introduction of gay themes. This is a Mexican film, Mexican and Hispanic humour, exaggerating characters and issues for all they are worth – and sometimes beyond!

And, the film is set in the world of fashion, many sequences of sketches and designs, of making and fixing costumes, of models, of the catwalk, of critical reaction? For audiences who enjoyed fashion films, they will be highly entertained.

The basic premise is that the star designer, Evaristo (Evo) has achieved fame in Mexico and beyond, the film opening with a fashion exhibition in New York. Later, Evo and the troupe will travel to Columbia. Evo is the gayest of gay fashion designers, all the mannerisms and more, extreme camp. However, it is revealed that he has not homosexual at all, in fact is rather homophobic, and has continuous affairs with his models, waitresses, women that he encounters in his travels.

Throughout the film, there are two young documentary makers are filming everything in Evo’s life. (One of them, female, tries to pass as male.) The couple go to all lengths to film Evo, including some of his heterosexual encounters. They are then prepared to sell their documentary footage to the highest bidder.

A jealous critic indicates that Evo is not gay so Evo’s chief adviser, shrewd and businesslike, suggest that he cultivate a gay relationship and chooses young man was come to work in the office.

A lot of the comedy is Evo’s attempts, often skew if, is often being outraged by being kissed by the young man, to cultivate the gay image, assisted by the documentary makers. The young man, on the contrary, is grieving the death of his husband and goes to work to survive. The husband has left him a lavish country house. And this is the occasion for Evo’s visits, the photography, and, finally, an attempt by a jealous husband of a model to kidnap Evo.

In the meantime, for promotion, Evo agrees to go to Columbia to raise money by an exhibition for orphans in an orphanage run by nuns. There is a lot of photography, the two men posing as parents with the orphans as family.

Complication after complication, of course. Evo, continually frantic, trying new designs, but withdrawing after the kidnap attempt and the kidnapper trying to force Evo to a high building. In the meantime, his manager and the young man design the next exhibition, Evo, still frantic, attending and being forced onto the catwalk. And the solution – a wedding between Evo, the young man, and the star model!

More than enough for a gay and camp audience. Silly and exaggerated enough for a wider audience.

IN FOR A MURDER

Poland, 2021, 104 minutes, Colour.

Anna Smolowik.

Directed by Piotr Mularuk.

This is a Polish entertainment, rather slight, reminiscent of the many television series which dramatise local murder mysteries. In fact, early in this film, there is a reference to Agatha Christie as well is a reference to Hitchcock.

The setting, like many of those British series, is a small town where everybody seems to know each other. The focus of attention is on maker, wife and mother, who works as a vet. She has an obnoxious husband, a tennis coach, flirting with the rich, critical of children walking on the lawn! On a walk with the dog, she discovers a dead body which leads, of course, to a police investigation as well as, of course, her becoming something of an amateur sleuth. Not exactly miss Marple but in that vein.

Which means that there are quite a number of suspects, quite number of eccentrics who live in the town, the older rich man who is flighty young wife is being coached a tennis, a goldsmith who made initial chains which become important for evidence, a retired businessman who has set himself up as something of a psychic, and the friendly vet – as well as the policeman who lives next door but it was set up as a figure of fun, incompetent, following Magda’s leads.

So, most people when they want to relax, enjoy this kind of like to murder mystery, memories of case of 15 years earlier and disappearance and now a dead body, another mysterious initial chain, and a Revelation that a shake visiting the town to some applause is actually the psychic setting himself up.

We follow all the details with Magda, discover the infidelity of her husband, find the villains trapping her in a cage with a vicious bulldog – whom she charms.

She packs her husband back and send him off – which leaves her enjoying her freedom.

The kind of film which is usually part of the series.

For moody Mondayitis

Whether you love them or hate them, the  Art of the  Pun should not be underestimated, as it takes skill to craft comical wordplay ,

that can make people laugh and cringe at the same time.

One group to master the art of funny puns ,  is the Indian Hills Community of Colorado,

who’ve been making regular punny roadside signage to the delight of everyone.

The man behind the jokes is Colorado native and volunteer at the community center, Vince Rozmiarek. He made his first sign as an April Fools prank and has never looked back. 

“It is hard to keep coming up with material, but I do try,”