ARCHENEMY

US, 2020, 90 minutes, Colour.

Joe Manganiello, Skylan Brooks, Zolee Griggs, Glenn Howerton, Amy Seimetz.

Directed by Adam Egypt Mortimer.

This is a very modest superhero thriller, very modest. A modest story, an alien coming to earth, holding on to his powers, encountering a young man and his older sister, the young man listening to him and wanting to tell his story, the sister involved in drug dealing and gangsters in the city.

So far, so ordinary. And with some special effects. Joe Mangin hello is Max, the alien, stranded on earth, looking rather bedraggled and like a hobo.

The gangster and his thugs go in pursuit of the sister who has stolen their money.

In the meantime, there is another alien, and archenemy, who ingratiate herself with the gangsters, attacks the brother and sister, builds up to a confrontation with Max.

And, within its modest limits, it achieves what it sets out to do.

1. Graphic novel? Animation? Live-action? Interconnecting?
2. The popularity of graphic novels, computer games, superheroes, action shows? Small budget? Variation on themes and styles?
3. Max and his story, alien, in the planets, his status, the issue of cosmic blood, falling to earth, looking like a vagrant, wandering the city? The encounter with hamster and his sister? A sense of mission? Telling his story to Hamster? The revelation about Indigo, drugs, the gangster boss, the confrontation, the Russian roulette, taking the money? The gangster and his henchmen, after her?
4. Hamster, young, the care from Indigo? Getting stories, interviewing Max? The visuals and the signs? Not believing? Accepting him? Max and the enmity from Cleo?
5. The action story, threats, action, fights? Cleo and her being on Earth, with the gangster? The confrontation with Max?
6. Indigo, the attack on her, her defending Hamster?
7. The fight between Max and Cleo, their falling to their deaths? Hamster observing? Indigo and her wounds, falling, touching the superhero is, absorbing their power?
8. Saturday matinee variation on a theme?

DIANA’S WEDDING/ DIANAS BRYLLUP

Norway, 2020, 86 minutes, Colour.

Marie Blokhus, Pal Sverre Hagen, Jannike Cruz, Olav Waastad. Ine Marie Wilmann, John emil Jorgensrud.

Directed by Charlotte Blom.

For many audiences who are not as young as they used to be, the title Diana’s Wedding would immediately bring to mind the 1981 Westminster Abbey ceremony where Diana Spencer married Prince Charles. Not sure whether Diana’s Wedding means very much to those under 40 since it is 40 years since that wedding. However, it is this wedding that is the point of reference for this comedy/drama about marriage.

The film opens in 1981, an exuberantly happy atmosphere as Live and Terge are married. The wedding is important for them when they name all their daughter, born 1981, Diana. Actually, as the film progresses, there are continued references to Diana and Prince Charles, happiness leading into unhappiness, Charles’s behaviour with Camilla, the separation, Diana and Dodi Al Fayed, and expressions of great grief at the news of her death.

It would be interesting to hear the Royal family’s response to the use of the wedding for this film, for British reactions. (Perhaps displeasure.) However, for the rest of the world, and in Europe, and throughout the Commonwealth, there are many mixed feelings about Diana and Charles.

But, of course, the focus is on Liv and Terje, the birth of their daughter, the young son, Cato. Liv and Terje tend to be a very happy-go-lucky couple, he at work with his mates, she at home with verve, at a holiday camp where the little Diana actually follows her father as he goes with the blokes to a strip club – and later draws photos of the pole-dancers to her mother’s dismay and anger against her husband. So, this is what marriages are like! Love, sometimes over the top, huge mistakes, eventual forgiveness, love again.

But this is by contrast with the couple across the street, Olav and Unni, welcoming the newcomers, revealing a contrasting marriage, he rather self-contained, concerned about his health, sometimes with a roving eye, she also a touch prim but gradually, with her drinking, loosening up – and even more loosening up. They have a daughter, Irene, and Diana and Irene are the best of friends.

Then, shock. It is 2020. Diana and Irene are still friends. It was big, bearded, burly, and a genial mediator in the family as well as the disc jockey. Diana is about to be married. And what about the couples? Liv age and Terge are just the same but the often-embarrassed and angry Diana doesn’t really want them at her wedding. Olav and Unni are much the same except that he is still self-preoccupied and Unni has become more desperately unhappy, taking it out on Irene and criticising her figure and weight.

Any resolution? You will have to see. However, the film’s overall tone is less like the unhappy marriage of Charles and Diana but the belief that, no matter what the ups and downs, no matter what the squabbles and tantrums, the underlying love is most important.

1. The title? The reference to the wedding between Charles and Diana? The continued points of reference throughout their marriage, the failure of the marriage, Diana’s death?
2. Audience response to the Diana references, British perspectives, European perspectives, worldwide perspectives?
3. The opening in 1981, Liv and Terge, engaged, the wedding, in love? Pregnancy? The birth of Diana and its effect? Cato as the young son? The progress of the marriage, ups and downs? Terge, his work, manual, his friends, drinking, celebrations? The moods between them? Liv at home? The holiday, the children playing, Diana following her father, the strip club, her later drawings, the revelation, the clash between husband and wife? This Is a pattern for their lives, moods, Terge having to move out, coming home, reconciliations?
4. The neighbours, watching the couple arrive, the friendly welcoming, the visits to the homes, the two girls playing together, Cato in the girl’s clothes? The ups and downs of Unni and Olav’s marriage? Rather proper, Olav and his work, observing, the touch of a roving eye, concerned about his weight and health? Passive? The approach to Liv? The contrast with Unni, drinking, coming out of her self, the years and the relationship with Olav?
5. The two girls, their friendship?
6. Suddenly in 2020, the girls grown up, their continued friendship? Diana, her engagement, not wanting her parents to come to the celebration, her fiance?
7. Liv and Terge in 2020, still together, the car breaking down, their still fighting? Their arrival, Diana rejecting them? Their leaving? The decision to come back? Cato, big and bearded, his interventions?
8. Unni and Olav, their coming, the tension between them, Olav in his self preoccupation, Unni older, their drifting apart, her criticisms of her daughter, Irene’s reactions? The relationship coming to a head, Unni and the advice, the decision to leave Olav, telling him of the divorce?
9. Diana and the prospect of her wedding, not being like her parents? Yet the reflection on them that they had stayed together, the ups and downs, fights, tantrums, exuberant behaviour, but, all the while, for loving each other?
10. A reflection on contemporary marriage relationships? Surface aspects? Deeper love?

GUNSHOT

Egypt, 2018, 97 minutes, Colour.

Ahamd El-Fishawi, Muhammed Mamdoo, Rubi, Arfa Abdulrasool.

Directed by Karim El- Shinnawi.

Gunshot is a thriller from Egypt.

While it is a thriller, there is a great deal of political comment, especially about government and uprisings, on protests, on the nature of government, government offices, communications and the rigging of communications.

The central character is a Dr, carrying out autopsies. He is alienated from his father who is prominent in government but is under accusation for fraud. His sister insists that he see his father. In the meantime, he carries out his job, giving accurate accounts of the autopsies. But, he is also drinking heavily.

The main complication is the death of a young man, seen as a protester and as a rebel, allegedly shot by a sniper, being hailed around the city as a martyr and Patriot. The Dr, the other hand, sees that the wound was inflicted close-up. He presents this document to his superior – but, under pressure, she issues another autopsy report which states that the man was killed by a sniper. The Dr is put on suspension. In the meantime, there is an eager young reporter who bribes one of the assistance in the coroner’s office to let her in, to see documents.

The doctor then begins his own investigation, tracking down the friend who proclaimed the young man a hero – to whom he owes considerable money. Then there is the brother of the dead man, who now has the gift of a specialist store and is about to marry his brother’s fiance. Then there is the mother of the two sons, the very strong woman.

As the doctor continues its investigation, enlisting the aid of the journalist who believes him, what actually happens is revealed, quite different indeed from the official report, especially the involvement with the victim’s mother (who agrees to a television interview but collapses). While the Dr is vindicated, it is questionable, in his condition, especially with the planted evidence about alcohol in his locker, what his future will be.

An opportunity to see an Egyptian drama, thriller.

1. The title? The shooting, the gun, at close quarters, the location for the shooting, the autopsy reports, the sniper at the protest, the finale and the truth?
2. The theme of the truth, the doctor and his reports, the journalist and her investigations, the head of the Department and the false report, the members of the family and the truth?
3. The Egyptian setting, the city, coroner’s office, newspaper offices, neighbourhoods, homes, street protests? Authentic atmosphere? Musical score?
4. The focus on the death of the young man, the autopsy and the nature of his wound, the doctor and his report, the claims that he was a martyr, a hero of the protest, the supervisor and her sending out the report stating death by sniper, the dead man, the 30 hours from when he was shot, in his home? His friend to whom he owed money, the confrontation with the doctor and declaring the man was a martyr? The role of his brother? The role of the fiancee, her pregnancy and scandal? The brother to marry her? The role of the mother, information, testimony on television? The confrontation by the doctor and journalist? The truth? A different story altogether from protest?
5. The doctor, his career, drinking, the reputation of his father, his father and the court case, his sister and her insistence, eventually visiting the father, talking with him, his father’s death? His report, the denials, the protesters against it, his superior and the alternate report, the journalist’s investigations, photographing the alcohol in his locker? His being suspended? His decision to find out the truth, confronting the dead man’s friend? The brother, following him, his shop, buying the battery for the phone, the threats, at the cemetery? The discussions with the journalist, their meetings, belief? Meeting with the fiancee? The discussions with the mother? Eventually everybody coming together? The truth? His signing the false autopsy report? His resignation?
6. The portrait of the family, the elderly mother, strength of character, her dead son, the cover up, misinformation, that the television station, the collapse? Telling the truth?
7. Khaled, his brother, the financial situation, his being granted an apartment, his work in the store, the confrontations with the doctor, at the store, at the cemetery, marrying the fiancee, gatecrashing the wedding and the truth? The flashback and recreation of the confrontation?
8. The journalist, her bosses, searching for information, paying the man at the coroner’s office? The articles, the investigations, discussions with the doctor, sharing his perspective?
9. The Egyptian background and flavour, the background of protests, yet this story one of domestic conflict?

KATE

US, 2021, 106 minutes, Colour.

Mary Elizabeth Winstead, Woody Harrelson, Miku Patricia Martineau, Jun Kunimura, Michiel Huisman.

Directed by Cedric Nicolas-Troyan.

In more recent decades, there have been films about female assassins, like La Femme Nikita American version with Bridget Fonda,. And, given the popularity of superhero movies, audiences can begin to take female assassins for granted, especially the two sisters, the women and their training, in Marvels Black Widow.

This action thriller is in that vein – which means asking the audience to put some of the values in abeyance as well is to test their tolerance for grim sequences, a touch of the gruesome, a touch of blood and gore.

This film doesn’t waste any time, showing us Kate, a more than vigourous Mary Elizabeth Winstead who is both attractive and unattractive in herself and her work. But, in the episode, she fails to reach her target, alarming the teenage niece of the target.

And the setting is Japan (though some filming in Thailand). The target was a wealthy gangster boss travelling with his entourage. The hit was in Osaka – and some attractive and fine views of the city. The action transfers to Tokyo, again some fine views but, this time, going into the various neighbourhoods and the touch of the sinister.

But, who is Kate? She is a survivor, a young girl, victim of violence, and taken on by a mastermind, master-organiser, Varick (played by Woody Harrelson in his familiar style). Kate discusses matters with Varick who is a kind of father-figure. She exercises. She trains. She has a steady of a with a rifle. She is handy with knives.

In a moment of relaxation, she buys a new dress, dresses glamorously, goes to a bar, encounters a young man and goes home with him. But, like the old captain DOA drama of 1949, she is poisoned (this time with radiation) and determines to find who was responsible.

Kate is nothing if not determined and thorough, getting medication from the pharmacy to sustain her through her deteriorating condition. She tracks down the young man, gets help from his girlfriend, confirms that the gangster chief is after her. She also tracks down the niece, spirited leave disagreeable, get information from her, gets some of the thugs to come to rescue – with some expected mayhem sequences, a bit more than expected.

Despite her condition, she pursues her quest, getting the help of the niece, finding the gangster – and the Revelation of some twists (which, by this time, we were probably expecting). And, what is the role of Varrick and Mark

And, just as the film seems to end, with Kate’s succumbing, she revives there is another substantial part of the film to go. It’s as if there was in the filmmakers mind, there was to be a Kate 2, and now here it is as an epilogue, new alliances, new deceits and twists,

With all the grim stuff, Kate is ultimately for the fans only.

1. Title? Focus on Kate? Her background, training? Assassin? Employment, jobs? The final crisis, 24 hours – and the epilogue?
2. The Japanese settings, Osaka, Tokyo, filmed in Hawaii and Thailand? Cities and visitors? Neighbourhoods, nightlife? Suburbs? Homes? Offices? The musical score?
3. The tradition of assassin films? Female assassins? The John Wick tradition? Outside the range of the law? Companies and assassins? Laws unto themselves?
4. Kate, her age, experience, the flashbacks, tragedy in her life, Varrick and his care for her, the details of training, her tests, unloaded guns, knives? Her skills? Seeing her with Varrick, his commissioning her?
5. The case in Osaka, taking position, the targets, out of the car, the shot, the girl and her grief? The effect?
6. Transition to Tokyo, Kate with Varrick, keeping in training? The new task? Vengeance on her?
7. The episode out on the town, buying the dress, the encounter at the bar, going to the apartment, the identity of the lover, her returning to get the information, the woman helping her?
8. Her being poisoned, radioactivity, the visible consequences, the pharmacy, getting the injections and tablets? Keeping her going? The shot, going amiss? Varrick and his response?
9. The drama of the quest, Kate and her ingenuity, information from the lover, finding the young girl, taking her, conflict, getting information, tying her up, in the toilet, her getting free? The phone calls, the connections, delegation of authority, the gangs in the streets, the fights and the shootouts? The information about the official taking her father’s place? The apartment, security, the boyfriend, the fight? In the car, the shootings? The bonding with the girl, admiration, not telling her the truth about her father’s death? Going to the family house, the boss, dignity and honour, yet a gangster? The meeting with Kate? The talk about avenging?
10. The discovery of the truth about Varrick, confrontation with Kate, the girl shooting her?
11. The fight in the house, the confrontation, the boss and his delicate, his death? Kate and Varrick and the confrontation? Her being shot?
12. The 30 minute epilogue, like Kate II, her revival, the move to vengeance, Kate and the confrontation with Varrick? Kate’s future? The girl?

THIS IS BOB HOPE

US, 2017, 90 minutes, Colour.

Directed by John Scheinfeld.

Bob Hope died at the age of 100 in 2003. For most of those hundred years he was an entertainer, becoming a celebrity in his 20s and continuing that until the end of the 20^th century. For many decades, radio and television and movie audiences not only knew who he was but liked him, enjoyed his entertainment.

Hope was born in England but his parents migrated to the US, to Cleveland, when he was four. He began his entertainment career in vaudeville, stage performances, comedy, expert dancing, learning how to appreciate his audience, working his audience, developing his timing. He then moved into radio in the 1930s, and in 1950 he moved to television, specialising in comic monologues, but also entertainment, some of it improvised, all live on television.

He had met Bing Crosby in the 30s and renewed acquaintance when he went to Hollywood to begin a film career. Paramount executives enjoyed their working together and thought they should appear on film – the beginning of the Road to movies, lots of in jokes, talking to camera, and putting each other down. But, Hope appeared in a number of comedies and established his signature song and melody, Thanks for the Memories. And, in 1940, he began 17 years of compering the Oscars, often making jokes about his never winning.

Don’t words from his memoirs are voiced here by Billy Crystal (who is seen paying tribute to Bob Hope at a later Oscars).

This film is most entertaining with so many clips from Bob Hope’s films, establishing his screen persona, fearful, sometimes timid in romance, lots of comedy, and sometimes, as with James Cagney in The Seven Little Foys, the flare for tap dancing.

One of the significant contributions of Bob Hope to entertainment was his travelling to Europe and throughout the Pacific during World War II, identifying with the troops, entertaining them. And this was to continue during peace times, during the Korean War, and into the Vietnam war – where, Bob Hope seemed to identify with the more hawkish tone, including conversations with Richard Nixon, which led to his being identified with the establishment and, in Vietnam, actually booed (with Connie Stevens reminiscing about how she was advised to sing something, began Silent Night and all the troops joined in).

There are many talking heads throughout this film (including Kermit the frog!). There are quite a number of screenwriters for Hope who reminisce about their working together, the kinds of jokes, his collaborating with them. There are also quite a number of excerpts from Woody Allen, offering insight into Hope’s method, screen presence, delivery and the influence on Allen himself in performance and writing. Other stars include Brooke shields and Tom Selleck. Also comments by Dick Cavett.

There is quite a lot of comment about his gregarious personality, his enjoyment in meeting people, signing autographs, coming alive when he went on stage, the rapport with his audience. There is a lot of comment also about how difficult it was to know the interior of Hope’s. His daughter Linda is a contributor to the comments, praise of Dolores Hope for her fidelity to her husband in 69 years of marriage while he had a reputation for extreme philandering. The Hopes adopted four children. There are photos and sequences illustrating his role as a father, though often absent (but always sending postcards to them).

This is a very entertaining documentary, immersing the audience in the personality and comedy of Bob Hope – but also insightful about his personality and relationships, his personal weaknesses in relationships, but acknowledging the joy and happiness he brought to so many people over such a long time.

WHITELEY

Australia, 2017, 90 minutes, Colour.

Directed by James Bogle.

Brett Whiteley was one of Australia’s most significant artists in the latter part of the 20^th century. He was a prolific painter, studying in Europe, especially in France, moving to England, working in the United States, then moving back home, setting up a studio, entering competitions including the Archibald prize. His adult life, perhaps paralleling so many artists, was disturbed, alcohol and drugs, relationships, leading to his untimely death at the age of 53.

The value of this portrait of Whiteley and his art is that the style of the film, its structure, its visuals, special effects, all reflect the visual style of Whiteley’s working and of his paintings. The audience sees many of the paintings, sometimes wide in scope, often in close-up, but the atmosphere throughout is of paint, colour, frequent arresting movement, studio interiors, specially chosen shots of nature, sunrise, skies and clouds…

The film is the work of director, James Bogle, who began with some feature films, including In the Winter Dark, based on a Tim Winton story, but then moving into television work.

The film recreates the early life of Whiteley, actors standing in for some of these sequences, then moving into clips of the artist himself and his work. There is a focus on his daughter, Arkie, who is seen suddenly saying that she was expecting news of her father’s death. Sadly, she herself died in her 30s from cancer. Also present is Whiteley’s wife, Wendy, married to him for a long period, sometimes alienated, putting up with him, supporting him in his work, and, after his death, spending years setting up a Memorial Garden in North Sydney.

Included in the film are comments from his friends and colleagues as welly as well as art experts.

His studio was turned into an exhibition space, making his work available to the general public.

The film serves as an introduction to Whiteley and his work – but also serves as a tribute of interest to those who know his work well.

SOMETHING THE LORD MADE

US, 2004, 110 minutes, Colour.

Alan Rickman, Mos Def, Mary Stuart Masterson, Kyra Sedgwick, Gabrielle Union, Merritt Weaver, Clayton La Boeuf, Charles S. Dutton.

Directed by Joseph Sargent.

Something the Lord Made is recommended viewing.

This is one of the best films that one could see about surgery, surgery in close-up, the role of the surgeons, the preparation, knowledge, research, the detail of the surgery itself, meticulous. While there was experimentation with animals, the focus of the film eventually is surgery on a “Blue Baby”, the first operation on the heart, where cardiac surgery was considered impossible. It took place at John’s Hopkins in Baltimore in the early 1940s.

This is also a strong film about race issues in the United States, the reality of segregation, the humiliation of the African-Americans, the assumed arrogance of some white people, the arrogance which was taken for granted.

The film opens in Nashville in 1930, focusing on the work of Dr Alfred Blaylock. He is portrayed in his always effective manner by Alan Rickman (filming between some of the Harry Potter films at the time). The central character, however, is a young African-American, Vivian Thomas, wanting to be a doctor, saving for college, skilled as a carpenter. He has the opportunity to meet Dr Blaylock, impresses the doctor by his knowledge, practical skills. They were to work together for over 30 years. He is played by Mos Def, the most affecting performance from the singer and entertainer.

The film also offers some background of the Thomas family, Charles S.Dutton as the patriarch, reminiscing about his grandfather as a slave who was freed. There is also Vivian’s brother, chip on shoulder, teacher, eventually involved in lawsuits for the betterment of teachers’ situations. Gabrielle union plays Vivian’s wife, Clara.

The film then transitions to Baltimore 1943, the atmosphere of war, Johns Hopkins where Dr Blaylock has been appointed in charge of surgery. He has brought Vivian with him. However, Vivian experiences the racism at the hospital as he did in the south, unable to enter the front door, clocking in, class C classification for wages, having to do repairs for the landlord to pay his rent, living in poor accommodation with his wife and children, the butt of comment – and of disbelief by some of the hospital staff.

However, Vivian is skilled in his knowledge, in the bond with Dr Blaylock, despite Dr Blaylock losing his temper and having to apologise, their working together on the project of heart surgery and the breakthrough.

The film spends quite an amount of time in the preparation for the surgery, helping audiences to understand the intricacies of the risks, and the operation itself where Vivian is not present at Dr Blaylock pages him and brings him in to help walking through the surgery.

The racism continues with Life Magazine photographing only the doctors, Vivian not included. The same happens with the segregated dinner, no mention of Vivian, Vivian dismayed and offering his resignation, trying to go to college but asked to begin right at the beginning of the course, going back to Dr Blaylock.

The payoff for everyone, and for audience emotion, is the tribute to Vivian at the end – after an interesting collage of what happened in the US after the end of the war, throughout the 1950s, into the 1960s, race issues, Martin Luther King, the assassination of JF Kennedy, the Vietnam war, where Vivian is presented with an honorary doctorate by Johns Hopkins and his portrait is unveiled, hanging on the wall adjacent to that of Dr Blaylock who died in 1964.

The film has a close-up of the two portraits, transitions into the two actual portraits, Vivian dying in 1985. The significant African-American character of the 20^th century and his contribution to surgery and medicine.

1. The title? Dr Blaylock’s comment about Vivian’s expertise and work? The surgery and participating in God’s creative work?
2. A true story, audience knowledge of Dr Blaylock and Vivian Thomas? Their work in Nashville, at Johns Hopki to’s and ns, the breakthrough with heart surgery, ultimate acclaim, portraits in the hospital?
3. A film about surgery, audiences able to understand the role of the surgeon, skills, knowledge, accuracy, research, laboratory assistants? The achievement in the 20^th century, heart surgery, “Blue Babies”? The consequences and the millions of such operations taken for granted after that?
4. A film about racism, segregation in the South, African-Americans standing back to let white people pass, their passing without acknowledgement? Neighbourhoods, comparative poverty, hardships? Separate entries, in the buses at the back, separate toilets…? Not being able to enter the front of a hospital? The consequences for African Americans? In the 1930s? Transition to the 1940s, from the South to Maryland, regulations within Johns Hopkins to the detriment of African-Americans, lower classifications on pay? Their being almost invisible in the public arena?
5. Vivian Thomas and his story, his family in the south, grandfather slave and freed? His father and his recounting the stories? His brother, teacher, chip on shoulder, hard life, lawsuits? Vivian at his carpentry, wanting to go to college, to be a doctor, saving his money – then the run of the bank and his losing all his savings? His being introduced to Dr Blaylock, going for the interview, his knowledge, observations, Blaylock questioning, employing him?
6. Dr Blaylock, the background of his tuberculosis, regaining his life and wanting to do good for people? Surgery and breakthrough, experimentation on animals? The details, the close-ups, the laboratory, the equipment? His personal manner? Working with Vivian, for more than 12 years? The comment that he did not go to Detroit because they would not accept Vivian going?
7. Vivian, relationship with Clara, marriage, children? His knowledge, powers of observation, intelligence, making connections, sketching, closing his eyes because he knew the interior during surgery? Helping Dr Blaylock, the various breakthroughs, Blaylock sometimes peremptory with him? But needing him? Blowups, Vivian walking out, Dr Blaylock apologising?
8. The transition to 1943, the war experience, Dr Blaylock transferred to Johns Hopkins, taking Vivian with him? The move for the family, Clara and her finding it difficult, objections, but supporting Vivian? The children?
9. Vivian, going to Johns Hopkins, experiencing racism and segregation, not allowed in the front door, having to clock in, the doctor telling him to get donuts and coffee, suspicions, talking behind his back and saying nigger? His first being seen in Baltimore serving at the dinner, yet his medical comments and helping Dr Blaylock?
10. The work at Johns Hopkins, the research, Dr Helen Taussig, her manner, hearing aid, earnestness, the children, the blue babies? The parents? Introducing Dr Blaylock and Vivian? The hope to work for the blue babies? The detailed discussions, the diagrams, the theories, the heart, the blood flow, possibilities? The small hearts and the intricate work? The parents, with their child, to make a decision, Dr Blaylock explaining to the engineer about changing the work of the pipes? Their decision?
11. The parents going to discuss with the priest, his caution, not interfering with God’s will, his coming to see Dr Blaylock, the doctor saying he wanted to give life, the priest wanting to collaborate with God’s will that the baby should die?
12. Other members of the staff, attitude towards Dr Blaylock, towards Vivian? The young doctors, their interest, discussions with Vivian, working with him? Dr Blaylock in the request for doctors to share with the surgery? The volunteers? The wariness of the authorities? That it was impossible to do surgery on the heart?
13. Dr Blaylock, personal life, Mary, their children, her driving the vans for the veterans to hospital, her support, his reliance on her, the night before the surgery, unable to sleep?
14. Dr Blaylock and his reliance on Vivian, the first visit to the house and Clara’s reaction? Vivian, class C, the poor wage, having to do handiwork for the landlord to pay the rent, Dr Blaylock installing a phone? Getting him reclassified?
15. The surgery, the close-ups of the blue baby, Dr Blaylock, hesitant, preparing, entering, the doctors and the authorities of serving? The beginning? His hesitancy? Memories of Vivian and his ability to talk Dr Blaylock through the work?
16. Walking out, paging Vivian even though it was against the regulations to page anyone except doctors, Vivian hurrying, coming to the room, the details of his talking Dr Blaylock through the surgery, quiet, unassuming? Helen present, the blood pressure? The intricacies, the explanations, the blood flowing into the baby’s face? Success and achievement?
17. The aftermath, Vivian with Clara and delete and support? The contrast with Dr Blaylock, the photography for Life Magazine, with all the doctors, by himself, cover, no mention of Vivian? His going to the banquet, putting on the waiter’s clothes, no mention of him? The visit of the International doctors and his being introduced?
18. At home, upset, going to Dr Blaylock, leaving? Selling medications, the support of the doctor?
19. Going home to Nashville, the family reunion, his brother and his teaching life, his father and pride? Approaching the college, hoping to sit for exams, their demanding that he begin from the beginning?
20. Knowing that he really wanted to work in surgery, returning to Dr Blaylock, accepted? The possibility of the transfer to Columbia University? Vivian wanting to stay in Baltimore?
21. Dr Blaylock’s death? The visual collage of the 1940s, 1950s, changing US, into the 60s, JFK, Vietnam, Martin Luther King?
22. Vivian, continuing to work, the change in race relationships, entering the foyer by the front door?
23. The ceremony, his doctorate, the speeches, Helen, his speech, the unveiling of the portrait?
24. The two portraits in the foyer? The transition to the actual portraits? Vivian’s death in 1985? Achievement as a person, in surgery, in the achievement of an African-American and the world of medicine and surgery?

Visiting Kensington out of Lockdown. Noticing the Grotto

Perhaps we walk past the Grotto and have never read the stone. Where did it come from? Who built the Grotto? Gerry Burke noticed it and sent the information and photos.

Piece of Stone

Brought from the

Lourdes      Grotto

By

Rev Fr Fleming

THIS GROTTO

ERECTED TO THE MEMORY OF

VERY REV FATHER TREAND

AND PIONEER MEMBERS OF

THE AUSTRALIAN PROVINCE

WAS CONSTRUCTED BY SCHOLSTICE 1928-30

MUCH OF THE STONE CAME FROM

ST.MARY’S CATHEDRAL

THE STATUE OF OUR LADY WAS PRESENTED BY

JENS FAMILY OF MT.GAMBIER

ALL WHO WORKED ON THE BUILDING OF THE

GROTTO LATER WENT TO THE MISSIONS

RIDE THE EAGLE

US, 2021, 88 minutes, Colour.

Jake Johnston, D’Arcy Carden, Susan Sarandon, J.K.Simmons.

Directed by Trent O’Donnell.

An unusual film, made during the Covid epidemic, very few sequences where actors are together, rather ways found for communication between characters, phone calls, a bequest by video… It is a work of Australian writer-director, Trent O’Donnell, who worked with comedian actor, Jake Johnston for television and they have collaborated on this particular story.

It is a star vehicle for Jake Johnston who portrays a middle-aged man, Leif. He doesn’t exactly undergo a midlife crisis but rather is given the opportunity for a mid-life reassessment.

He has had something of an ambling life, playing in a band, skills in music and performance. He had been abandoned by his mother at the age of 12 when she had joined a cult. He has not had communication with her. Suddenly, his life is changed when a friend arrives with news that his mother has died and that she has left him her chalet – with some conditions.

The main drama/comedy of the film is his going to the chalet, looking at the video from his mother – who is played in her familiar style by Susan Sarandon. She offers him a particular bucket list which she thinks is important for him. He has to put a note on the pillow of a local, Carl, who reacts very badly, stalking Leif, covered in a hood, putting dead rabbits on the windscreen of his car, finally angrily confronting him. He has been Leif’s mother’s lover and suspected Leif as his replacement. That matter is resolved!

The film takes advantage of some of the local scenery where leaf has to go to kill his own food and goes fishing in a lake with mixed results. He has also to make a trek out into the mountains to find his mother’s ashes, read a declaration she has written and scatter the ashes in the lake. Also important is her injunction that he communicate with “one that got away” which means that some of the drama and comedy consists of his phone conversations with Audrey, with whom he had broken eight years earlier but who is still fond of him.

Mother congratulates her son from the video as he finishes his tasks. She is satisfied that he has tried whether you succeeded or not – and the chalet is his. D’Arcy Cardin, who also produced the film, bring some mischievous energy to Audrey.

Not particularly startling when you come to think of it, but Jake Johnston has a rather cheeky screen presence which has attractive moments. JK Simmons flashes angrily as Carl.

And the title, explained at the end, is a verse which indicates from his mother that Leif has ventured out, shown in a sketch, Riding the Eagle.

1. A film made during covid times and conditions? The writing, Jake Johnston and his performance, communication with other actors but not together on screen, except for J.K.Simmons, Missy, Gorky and the passing traveller in the woods? And the device of having Susan Sarandon on video? How effective?
2. Midlife crisis? Mid-life clarification? Leif, his hut, community, the band? The visit from his mother’s friend? The news about the bequest?
3. The use of location photography, Leif and his hut, the surroundings, homes? The contrast with the road, the open spaces? The beauty of Yosemite, mountains, tracks, lakes? The musical score?
4. Leif, his age, relationship with his mother, her abandon him when a child, her going to the cult? Lack of communication with her? His own life, relationships, memories of Audrey? Music, the band?
5. His travelling to his mother’s heart, a substantial building, comfortable? Her bucket list for him? His fighting the video, playing it, the revelation of her character, her past, her love for her son despite everything? The list, his returning to the video for each task? And her satisfaction at the end whatever his decisions?
6. The variety of tasks? His mother wanting to bring him out of himself? His going to Carl’s house, the note on the pillow? The consequence of Carl, hooded, stalking him, the dead rabbits on the car, Leif ringing the police, his desperate plea, Carl and the confrontation?
7. His mother wanting him to ring “the one that got away”? His telephoning Audrey, Audrey and her life, her personality, her reaction to Leif, listening, cooking, putting him off, phoning again? The happy banter and interactions, topics, sexuality, the past? His invitation for her to come? Her deciding it was too far for the drive and wondering about the consequences? The interaction illustrating that Leif could relate to people?
8. The music, the song, his friend Gorky, the band, Gorky ringing, their not wanting Leif in the band?
9. The request that Leif Hunt his own food, the humorous attempts at fishing and to get the fish?
10. The task to go on the trek, the map, the beauty of the countryside and his appreciating it, the information about the box, the ashes, to distribute them, to read out his mother’s bequest? And the irony of finding out they were knocked her ashes but that she was wanting him to acknowledge her?
11. The misunderstanding with Carl, his thinking that Leif was a lover, his anger, his absence, not knowing of Honey’s death, resolving misunderstanding?
12. A midlife reassessment of life?

SAS: THE RISE OF THE BLACK SWAN/ SAS: RED NOTICE

UK, 2021, 124 minutes, Colour.

Sam Heughan, Ruby Rose, Andy Serkis, Hannah John- Kamen, Tom Hopper, Noel Clarke, Owain Yeoman, Jim Belushi, Ray Panthaki, Richard McCabe, Anne Reid, Tom Wilkinson.

Directed by Magnus Martens.

In many ways this is an old-fashioned British action show. It is based on a novel by Andy McNabb, popular writer in the vein of Alistair Maclean. McNabb himself was an SAS officer and was tortured during the first Gulf War. This is an SAS story but not in the expected vein.

The film was reviewed very badly. And, with bloggers like those in the IMDb, there was hardly a word in its favour. However, for audiences who came across it on Netflix, it probably serves as enjoyable wars/terrorist action.

In some ways, the opening seems to be rather off-putting. There is Tom Wilkinson leading an expedition in Georgia – but there is a sadistically savage attack on the locals in the village, visually disturbing. And, then, the revelation that Tom Wilkinson and his daughter, Ruby Rose, and rather despised son, Owain Yeoman, run a mercenaries’ outfit, living comfortably in a mansion in the British countryside, available to the highest bidder. And, in this opening, it emerges that they have been employed by the British government, represented by the military man, Andie Serkis, but also with the knowledge of the Prime Minister (Ray Panthaki). The family is to be paid a huge amount of government money for terrorising people in the village so that other members of towns along a projected pipeline will be eager in selling up the land for the pipes.

And, that is only the beginning. The Prime Minister and his liaison fear bad publicity if the truth was revealed. Andy Serkis is commissioned to put the family out of action, especially the ruthless daughter, Grace, a conscienceless woman, who takes charge in operations. There is a raid on their mansion, Andy Serkis confronting Tom Wilkinson and killing him. The daughter escapes.

The meantime, the hero of the film, Tom Buckingham (Sam Heughan), military, trained in combat, wanting to propose to his doctor girlfriend (Anna John-Kamen) during a trip to Paris, is ordered to take part in the raid on the mansion.

The main part of the drama takes place in the Eurostar train in the Eurostar Channel tunnel. The hero and fiancee becoming tangled with Grace who has stopped the train, loaded it with explosives, threatening to expose the British government.

Lots of old-style action on the part of the hero, under the train, outside the train, within the many tunnels and caverns of the Channel tunnel. The doctor is also taken, helping the wounded girl, getting her to her fiance and safety, her being tortured and held as hostage. The military are called in, Andy Serkis taking charge again, and confronting Grace. But, we have known earlier that there is a traitor sending information and photos to Grace, the rather straight up-and-down official played by Noel Clarke as the main suspect but, as in all these stories, the real traitor is the hero’s best friend, played by Tom Hopper.

Lots of fights, lots of action, explosions, and an approach to visualising deaths and torture in more graphic ways than many audiences for this kind of story might like. But an attractive finale, beautiful drain scenery, happy marriage – and, obviously, plans for more such stories.

So, an old-fashioned story, huge criticisms of the performance by Australian Ruby Rose (though this reviewer found her most chillingly credible), an accusation of overuse of cliches and conventions. But, there it is.