FOR RICHER, FOR POORER

US, 1992, 90 minutes, Colour.

Jack Lemmon, Talia Shire, Jonathan Silverman, Joanna Gleeson, Madeline Kahn.

Directed by Jay Sandrich.

For Richer, For Poorer, is an HBO television vision movie from the early 1990s, part of a program of significant films made for television during the 1990s and the to thousands. However, this is slighter than many of the other films and not particularly well-known, even though it is a star vehicle for Jack Lemmon.

The film serves as something of an allegory about self-made men, success, wealth, the consequences for the image of themselves, their family, expectations of the next generation.

The film introduces the character of Jack Lemmon’s Aram, explaining his background in wealth, his relationship with his wife, Millie (Talia Shire), with his son, Michael (Jonathan Silverman). There is also his mistress, Irene (Joanna Gleeson). Who could ask for anything more? The answer is in his expectations for his son.

However, the film opens with an attempted suicide over a freeway in Los Angeles and Arabs encounter with a homeless woman who asks if she can observe what he is doing. She is played by Madeline Kahn (more serious roles in the 1980s and 1990s after her outstanding comic roles in the 1970s). The framework of the film is the two of them walking through Los Angeles, enjoying a meal, Aram telling his story.

As he explains his story, it is told in flashbacks, especially his disappointment with his son who is prepared to laze around, do nothing, live on his father’s wealth. Aram then decides to liquidate all his business interests, give the money to the poor and charities. He then confront his wife – although, as the film progresses, Millie is far more able to cope with the change of situation, eventually starting a business and working successfully (in collaboration with Irene). On the other hand, Michael does not change, marries a wealthy woman.

When Aram returns after two years wandering America, prepared for a divorce, he is amazed at Millie’s success, his son’s divorce and million-dollar settlement, and then encounters him working as a waiter in a restaurant. Aram then is able to relax, his son looking after him.

Aram is certainly an ambiguous character with his wife, his mistress, his business decisions, his getting temporary work, his attitude towards his son.

Direction is by Jay Sandrich, a prolific director for television.

1. The title, the marriage vows? The emphasis on riches and poverty?
2. Comedy, drama, allegory about work and career, identity?
3. The Los Angeles setting, the world of big business, and affluent world, the contrast with the streets, the homeless? Workplaces, shoe shops, car wash, bicycle deliveries, restaurants and waiting…? The musical score?
4. Aram and his story? Introduced by his attempted suicide, the overpass, the encounter with Billie, her watching, the conversation, his inability to kill himself, even at a better location? Billie and her friendship, support, his money and his watch, listening to his story, wandering the streets? Her curiosity? Audience curiosity?
5. Aram and his story, starting with poverty, the achievements of his ancestors? Pride? Health foods? His stores? His visiting, the disguises, the supervisors, hopeful young workers? The comedy of his disguises? The background information about his marriage to Millie, Irene as his mistress, his expectations of his son, Michael?
6. Money, profits, millions? Millie and her background, never working, marriage, getting used to affluence? Michael, his studies, expectations that he would live of his father’s wealth? Outings, dates, lazing around the house?
7. Aram and his decision, liquidating all his assets, money to charities, money to people on the street, including Billie? Explaining everything to Millie? Her acceptance, adaptation? Michael, not accepting the philosophy of having to work, his range of arguments against any kind of employment? Aram going to the job opportunities, cleaning cars, the shoe shop, riding the bike and his aches? The crash, hospital? The bills? The new apartment, giving up everything that the furniture? The contrast with Michael selling his clothes to make money?
8. Aram and his visits to Irene, her support, the discussions about sexuality, Irene and the contrast with Millie? Millie and her adaptation, cooking the meals, living within means, babysitting…?
9. Michael, the engagement, marrying into wealth? His father’s disgust, disowning him?
10. Aram, the message to Millie on the video, his disappearance, two years wandering, of jobs, sending the money but no message? His return? Millie and her success, meeting Irene, knowing the truth all the time, setting up the strudel shops, partnership, more shops? Her sense of achievement?
11. The news of Michael’s divorce, the settlement? Going to the restaurant, Michael as the waiter, his explanations of enjoying the meal and everybody involved, going back, getting the job, achievement, the reconciliation? And finally supporting his father?
12. A fable about wealth, poverty, work, identity?

ANN RULE’S CIRCLE OF DECEPTION

US, 2021, 87 minutes, Colour.

Diane Neal, Tahmoh Penikett, Tamara Tunie, April Telek, Viv Leacock, Paul McGillion, Jill Morrison.

Directed by Ashley Williams.

This is a Lifetime television movie, the second film based on popular novels by Ann Rule.

This is a mixture of soap opera and melodrama, in the characters, their performances, the dialogue. It will not be to the taste of those who want something more substantial even in their telemovies.

The setting is an island off Washington State with excursions to Las Vegas and Florida. It opens with a murder, going back year, the audience seeing who the murder victim is and his connection with various characters.

This is a film in which none of the central characters is at all likeable. The only sympathetic characters are the detectives investigating the case. The narrative is told by a middle-aged matron, played by Diane Neal, who could pass for Jennifer Coolidge in the past. She is a go-getting, unscrupulous, ultimately conscience-less woman who sets her sights on a man who turns out to be a no-good, who resents his stepfather’s brutal behaviour, declares that he would really like to kill someone. And he does. There is the victim who seem sympathetic, especially with his daughter, but is carrying on affair, betraying his wife. She ought to be more sympathetic but is moody, erratic behaviour, asking for restraining order, stopping it when there is a possibility of reconciliation, completely impassive when informed of her husband’s death and more preoccupied with his life insurance policy. There is also the central character’s half sister who is prepared to give testimony against her but kills herself. The No-gooder goes back to his wife who loves him despite everything and her drug addiction habits.

The dialogue is very ordinary, the situation is highly contrived, not a film to put on one’s must-see or even see-list.

STILL HERE

US, 2020, 99 minutes, Colour.

Johnny Whitworth, Maurice McRae, Ashton Williamson, Jared Kemp, Zazie Beetz, Ashton Williamson, Larry Pyne, Jeremy Holm, Stephen Hauck, Danny Johnson, Justiin A Davies.

Directed by Vlad Feier.

Still Here is based on a true story, with a focus on the disappearance of children all over the United States, abductions, abuse, murders.

The film was written and directed by Romanian-born director who moved to the US, Vlad Feier. While it plays as a drama, it also has strong overtones of popular crime-investigation programs.

There are three focuses of the narrative, opening with an African-American worker, delighting in playing with his young daughter, then experiencing the mystery of her disappearance, the actor Maurice McRae able to communicate an extraordinary amount of grief, incessant search for his daughter, going for days putting up notices and handing out photos of his daughter to the local inhabitants. And, he and his wife, with their distraught teenage son, feel of the police are not doing anything.

The second focus of the narrative is on a young journalist, Johnny Whitworth, criticised by his editor for failing standards, his determination to write better, being given the case to investigate, interrogating (and paying) some of the local youth, getting a lead which he follows, publishing the article, which stirs the police into making an arrest, which proves to be a false arrest and the suspect killing himself.

The third focus is that on the police themselves, more like documentary material, much less like the police we see in popular television shows. They are hard men. We see their brutal treatment in the interrogation of the suspect, and the demands of the chief to get a result, no matter what. He is also quite racist in his demands and comments. One of the detectives is disturbed by the course of events but is supported by the tough stances of his African-American partner.

The family are resistant to the investigations by the reporter but eventually open up – but with a harrowing sequence when the body of a young girl is found in a dumpster. The journalist gets another lead which leads to an arrest, the suspect living on the same floor as the family, an interrogation sequence with his confession, dramatised for the audience, and the final rescue of the daughter.

The film is a complex emotional experience, sharing the grief of the family, the energy and the bewilderment of the journalist, the dilemmas of the detectives and their personal lives and the demands of their duties.

1. Based on a true story? Disappearances of children in the United States? Alarming statistics? Those lost, those found, the final list in voice-over?
2. The style of the film, crime investigation, newspaper reporting, police work, lack of interest, shamed into action, results in a matter what the cost, combined with the personal story and anguish?
3. The New York settings, the neighbourhood, the streets, the parks, the young men hanging around, the apartment blocks, interiors, newspaper offices, police precincts? The musical score?
4. The three focal points of the narrative, elaboration of each, eventually intercutting? The dramatic effect?
5. The focus on Michael Watson, the emotion of the sequences of his playing with Monique, the suddenness of her disappearance, the effect on him, desperation, posters, the many sequences of his attempted distribution, acceptance, rejection? Emotions at home, with his wife? Her being distraught? The effect on Andre, his age, emotions, not going to school? Michael and his going to the support group, walking out, eventually going back, continuing his story, their support? Anger at the police seeming lack of interest and follow-up? Emotional portrait of a desperate man?
6. Christian Baker, journalist, his boss reprimanding him? Giving him a new chance, a new case, his decision to investigate, talking with the young men, the hundred dollars and the watch, getting the lead, writing the article, going to the house, Michael’s angry rejection of him, his discussions with Tiffany, the explanation of the article?
7. The police, black and white, long experience, hard men, the chief, demanding attitudes, racist language, wanting results no matter what? The lead, going into action, pursuing the man, the severe interrogations, terror, bullying? His going to the toilet, sick, killing himself? And the irony of the alibi?
8. The effect on Christian, his withdrawing from the case, decision to become involved again, going back to the young men, the lead about Marcus, his interviewing his girlfriend, the strong condemnation of him, the lead about young girls? Confronting him? Writing the article and giving it to the other journalist? His vindication?
9. The police, the discussions between the two, their past, emotions, objectivity, arresting Marcus, the grilling and interrogation? His succumbing, the explanation?
10. The finding of the body of the girl in the dumpster? Michael and his wife watching, the effect on Andre? The emotional effect, Michael going to the dumpster, not his daughter?
11. Marcus, the confession, the visualising of his confession, his story of what he did with Monique, hiding her, her surviving?
12. The police, saving Monique, restored to her family, to her father?
13. The blend of documentary crime investigation style with the drama of the family, of the journalist, of the police?

MONTANA

US, 1990, 90 minutes, Colour.

Gena Rowlands, Richard Crenna, Lea Thompson, Justin Deas, Elizabeth Berridge, Darren Dalton, Scott Coffey, Michael Madsen.

Directed by William A.Graham.

Montana is one of the earliest of the series of significant HBO films made for television during the 1990s and into the 2000s.

It is a western, significant because it was written by veteran Larry McMurtry, writer of The Last Picture Show, Lonesome Dove, Terms of Endearment and many other novels and screenplays.

The setting is the state of Montana, with beautiful photography of the mountains and landscapes, the open ranges and the breeding of cattle, the arrival of teams involved in oil and coal exploration, significant at the end of the 20^th century, and stances taken between the developers and the old homesteaders. The focus is on a husband and wife and their long marriage, she in the tradition of the cattle owners, he interested in the further developments. They have a son and daughter, the son interested in the developments, the daughter siding with her mother. The daughter is played by Lea Thompson.

The film has the expected conflicts, arguments, taking sides, scenes of cattle runs, scenes of life in the town, Native Americans, drinking, lassoing.

The film is interesting in retrospect given the developments of the first decades of the 21^st-century and the issues of climate change, the uses of fossil fuels…

1. A late 20^th century Western? Style? Themes? The future of wrenching and of mining, oil and coal?
2. The Montana settings, the landscapes, the audience is immersed, the background mountains, the valleys, the cattle spreads, the towns? The musical score?
3. The conflict between the ranchers and those hoping for wealth from coal? A 20^th-century issue? Seen in retrospect? Climate change, fossil fuels…?
4. The film written by Larry McMurtry, his reputation, his interpretation of the American West?
5. The clash between Bess and Hoyce? 34 years marriage? The children? Her ownership of the land? The management of the land, debts? His signing the document about oil and coal exploration? Her shooting the equipment? Clash, separation, his moving out? She a woman of determination? He a cowboy, going to town, lassoing the Indian, the fight in the town, money, drinking?
6. Peg, on her mother’s side, studies and ambitions, coming home, the clashes with Clyde, the flight, her husband and his jobs, taking another side, with her father, in town, the drinking? Her stances?
7. Clyde, different opinions, clashing with his mother, marriage? Flying the plane, giving the woman the lift? Responsible and irresponsible?
8. Life in Montana, the traditions, the cattle, going out to roundup the cattle, bringing them in, everybody participating? Willie, his ambitions, his hat, falling off the horse…?
9. Bess, discussions with her husband, with Peg, change of mind? Her husband’s reaction? Peg’s reaction? The presence of the native Americans and their influence?
10. The end of the 20^th century, the traditions of the land, the tradition of exploiting fossil fuels, the future?

LAST SUMMER

US, 2013, 73 minutes, Colour.

Samuel Pettit, Sean Rose, Robin Sullivant, Byron Taylor, Deb Lewis.

Directed by Mark Thiedemann.

While there is a core narrative basis for this film, it is more of a mood piece, more of a visual poem.

The potential audience has warning of the style of the film in the opening three minutes, quiet contemplation of wood, art, no hurry. And, throughout the film, classical music is used from Beethoven and Schumann. Clearly, the filmmaker has a love of art and the arts.

The Director’s films usually incorporate themes of homosexual relationships. Most of his films have been short films, glimpses, a contemporary poetic interpretation of Cain and Abel, two young men at a baths, Swimsuit. However, the film to recommend to understand the director’s work and his themes is the 39 minute short film, Sacred Hearts, Lost Souls, set in the Catholic boys’ boarding school, focusing on friendships, bullying, sexual preoccupations, physical activity and sport, a sympathetic counseller nun, a severe and old-fashioned priest principal. And, throughout the film, there are many stills of classic art, especially Caravaggio. There is also classic musical background, principally Chopin.

In this film, however, there are two young men during the summer before one of them goes off to college and the other, a sportsman but not a student, will remain in the Arkansas town. After the initial contemplation, there is a scene where the athlete talks to a teacher, sympathetic, explaining his situation, focusing on her responses. And, throughout the film, there are some of the townspeople, including one of the fathers, played by nonprofessional actors from the town. (Mark Thiedemann is from and Arkansas, studied in New York, but returned and has made all his films in Arkansas where he teaches.)

There are many scenes between the two boys. The relationship, friends since they were young boys together, seemingly easily accepted in the town. This is not a film about homophobia. Rather, it is a portrait of the two boys, glimpses rather than analysis, the realisation that they have to grow up, that some people have to move away from their homes while others feel contented and do not want to move away.

Certainly not a film from the mainstream audience, but a specialist film for those who enjoy visual art, classical music, portrait of people.

CIRCUS OF BOOKS

US, 2019, 92 minutes, Colour.

Directed by Rachel Mason.

A documentary which combines the respectable with the exploitative. It received a number of nominations and awards including an Emmy for non-fiction writing.

On the one hand, it goes back to the 1970s, the pornographic film industry, sex magazines, including those produced by Larry Flynt. On the other hand, the film is a portrait of a couple, Jewish background, who became involved in the porn industry, first of all with the distribution of Flynt’s magazines, finding more and more outlets, more magazines, taking over a pornography bookstore in Los Angeles and focusing on gay pornography, even moving into production themselves, especially with the celebrity director, Matt Sterling, and his star, Jeff Stryker. Both Larry Flynt and Jeff Stryker interviewed during the film, remembering and offering hindsight perspectives.

It can be noted that the exploitation material is principally in the showing of covers of magazines and of videos and DVDs in the shop. Generally in passing.

Karen Mason is a very strong figure and offers an interesting take on her life, journalist, interviewing Flynt, religious Jewish background, moving to Los Angeles, meeting Barry Mason, their marrying, the long marriage, his being an inventor, working in the film industry, their productions, the management of the shop, tributes, quite fulsome, from their many employees. They have a completely non-moral perspective on their career within the porn industry.

The film was made by their daughter, Rachel Mason. Their sons also appear, especially Micah who is gay, repressing himself during his teenage years, now talking frankly to camera.

The film provides some detailed background, especially from campaigners from the past, on the secrecy of gay lives in the 1960s, public protests and demonstrations in Los Angeles, the gradual change, moving to protests and parades.

Mainly of interest for social background to sexual mores and attitudes in the United States.

I AM PATRICK SWAYZE

US, 2019, 92 minutes, Colour.

Directed by Adrian Buitenhuis.

This portrait of Patrick Swayze is one of a series of studies of actors (including Heath Ledger, Paul Walker, Burt Reynolds, Steve McQueen) directed by Adrian Buitenhuis.

These documentaries offer an opportunity for movie lovers to learn something of the star, life and background, career and development, relationships, strengths and problems. Patrick Swayze died at the age of 57 from cancer.

What emerges from this film is a very sympathetic portrait of Swayze. He is a man of strong ego and determination. The impact for most of the documentary will make audiences like him. It is only towards the end that some of the problems emerge, a drinking problem, the pressure on his wife of so many years, Lisa Niemi, and her moving out from him for a year.

As regards his career, we see some scenes from Skateboard USA indicating his gymnastic and dance skills, but the breakthrough, dramatically, with Francis Ford Coppola is The Outsiders. A great deal of attention is given, of course, to Dirty Dancing, followed by Ghost. And there are some scenes with him in full drag costumes in To Fong Woo… Finally, there are scenes from the television series he was involved in before he died, The Beast.

One of the advantages of this portrait is that so much of it is given by his wife, meeting early, together in New York, marrying, sadly unable to have children after a miscarriage, her own skills in dance, supporting her husband, sharing the enjoyment of the ranch that they bought, his attention to her at public events. The other advantage is the testimony from his younger brother, Don Swayze, with great appreciation of Patrick, talking about his place in the family and relationship with their parents, very supportive, especially his final comments.

The film also has the advantage of comments from Patrick Swayze’s manager and agent and personal assistant, also strongly favourable. And, very interesting comments and observations as well as personal empathy with Swayze from co-stars Rob Lowe, C.Thomas Howell, Jennifer Gray, Demi Moore, Kelly Lynch – and action star Marshall Teague, with long scenes from their fights in Roadhouse.

In fact, there is also great emphasis on Patrick Swayze being influenced by his dance instructor mother (who could be very demanding, at times tyrannical) but who also speaks about her son. He trained as a ballet dancer, suffered from sports injuries and knee reconstruction, but was determined to continue as a dancer. On the other hand, he was devoted to his father who encouraged him in outdoor activities, sport, horse riding, to be something of a cowboy. Sadly, his father died of a heart attack age 57 – and the documentary offers excerpts from Swayze’s interview with Barbara Walters after his father’s death, his warm acknowledgement of his father, his tears. And the suggestion that this cemented Swayze’s reputation and audience response to him.

There are some final scenes with Swayze speaking in public about his cancer and being active in raising consciousness and support for cancer victims.

_{Addendum, Back to Via Balbo.  MSC Students in Rome before World War II}

_{Yesterday news from Via Aventina, now going back to the 1920s and 1930s. Now we have a list of those who were sent before the war. Quite an interesting group who contributed a great deal to the province and the whole congregation.}

 _{There is a memento photo of each man – except for Fr Frank Butler. There is no photo of him in Jim Littleton’s books on deceased MSC.  The photo below is from the original Chevalier staff, 1946, edited and cropped. (Many in the province will have a picture of him in their memories of Novitiate days.)}

_{For those not as young as they used to be - nostalgia and memories (sometimes mixed!)}

_{Leslie Rumble, Doc Rumble. Radio ministry for 40 years, Radio Replies.}

 _{Patrick McCabe, superior general, 1947-1959}

_{Harry Reid, military service, first Rector of Chevalier College, Foundation of Japanese mission.}

_{Vin Dwyer, Rector of Downlands, parishes, mission in Kiribati}

_{Patrick McGuane, Director of Students, Novice Master, 1952-1954, compendium of writing on Our Lady of the Sacred Heart.}

_{Darcy Morris, lecturer in Scripture, Speaker, Catholic Evidence Guild.}

_{Frank Butler, Prefect Apostolic School, Foundation Staff Chevalier, Novice Master, 1955-1966.}

_{Bill Clune, Lecturer, parishes.}

_{John O’Loughlin, returned to Australia after a short time, Bishop of Darwin, 19491985}

_{Harry Jordan, lecturer, Canon Law, adviser to Bishop Stewart in Bendigo, Missions and Retreats.}

_{J.J. McMahon, musician and composer, Rector Chevalier and Monivae, Superior Via Aventina.}

_{Kevin Graydon, military service, retreats and missions.}

_{Mervyn ‘Vyn’ Bailer, seminary lecturing, missions NT, India, Ashram at DP}

_{Jack Tyler, longtime physics teacher}

_{Eddie Kelly, retreats, Auxiliary Bishop of Sydney, Bishop of Toowoomba}

OBAMA: IN PURSUIT OF A MORE PERFECT UNION

US, 2021, 3X105, Colour.

Directed by Peter W. Kunhardt.

This is a three-part HBO documentary from August 2021. It is well worth seeing and reflecting on, the significance of the first black American president, and in the light of the four years of the subsequent Trump administration. And, especially with the election of President Biden, seen at the side of Obama during his campaign and the eight years of presidency.

The film has a subtitle: In Pursuit of a More Perfect Union. And, this is the thrust of the documentary. It is not an analysis of Obama’s presidency, details of American legislation (though an emphasis on Obamacare), practically nothing on foreign policy and relationships of the United States to countries around the world. Rather, the emphasis is on bringing all Americans together, the experience of racism, Obama’s vision and attempts to bring races together. “We can.”

The series has three parts: the first part showing Obama’s origin and background, his growing up, family issues, his education, his talents, organising, politics. The second part focuses on the 2008 campaign. The third part is an overview of his presidency in the light of the more perfect union theme.

The documentary has the advantage of huge range of archival footage to draw on. There are many photos of Obama when young, with his intellectual father from Kenya and is leaving his family, his white mother, many tributes to her, and, especially, his white grandmother. Later he has the opportunity to meet his relatives in Kenya. The first part traces in some detail his growing up, education, time in Indonesia, university studies, Harvard and his achievement and positions, his writing, his move to Chicago, church connections, moving into organising and, eventually, into politics.

John Kerry invited Obama to speak at the 2004 Democrat Convention and his visionary speech made quite an impression, making him a credible candidate for the presidency in 2008. The film shows the range of responses to his candidature, the African-American support, the white racism and, a range of dirty tricks and embarrassment and his dignified handling of these situations. We travel to the various Primaries, the competition from Hillary Clinton, the influence of Bill Clinton. And, the extraordinary experience of the election night and his winning the presidency.

The producers have been able to document all this visually with wide and substantial television footage.

And, there is quite a range of talking heads throughout the series, black leaders, especially Al Sharpton, and with Jesse Jackson. There are also significant white commentators but, most especially, Obama’s political adviser, David Axelrod who is a wise and steadying influence throughout all these years. There are also interesting comments from the editor of the New Yorker, David Remnick.

The third part shows the years of the presidency, the drama of the financial crisis of 2008-2009, Obamacare (and what seems to outsiders the irrational opposition, “socialist manoeuvrings”, by those who would benefit from the legislation), continuing race issues.

But, all the time, the series focuses on Obama’s outreach to both black and white, combating, with some humour at Donald Trump’s expense, the conspiracy theories about his being Muslim, not an American… And, all the time, especially with deaths of black men at the hands of the police, trying to bring everyone together, with some lapses which he acknowledges, but, amongst others, his moving presence, along with the vice president, at the funeral of the eight women who were shot by the young racist in the synagogue.

There is no mention that Hillary Clinton became his Sec Gen, but she appears in many sequences. There is no explicit mention of Joe Biden although the film was released during the first year of his presidency. His continued presence with Obama indicates Obama’s influence on Biden.

At first in the background, there is Michelle and the couple’s two daughters, then the campaigns, the years in the White House, Michelle Obama emerging more and more as a public figure.

(The general response to this series has been strongly positive – but, as indication of the opposition to Barack Obama’s vision, here are to bloggers comments from the IMDb, to hostile, along with 13 enthusiastic bloggers.

This is the biggest grade A lies I've seen, it's a joke. How this man got a TV show is not beyond me as we all know the Nexus these people run. This series is embarrassing & hard to watch. Rather watch lamestream News. Actually don't.

Inaccurate nonsense presented as facts. This whole thing is a terrible joke, like it's a big lie with the straightest face.. Just terrible, time will play it's role.. wait n watch.)

SACRED HEARTS, HOLY SOULS

US, 2014, 39 minutes, Colour.

Harrison Tanner Dean, Quinn Gasaway, Schaefer Bourne, C.Tucker Steinmetz, Karen Q.Clark, Jim Linsley.

Directed by Mark Thiedeman.      

A brief, 39 minute narrative film, set in an Arkansas Catholic Boys’ Boarding school named after the young saint, Dominic Savio.  The tagline for the film and repeated in sites and reviews on the film has a tone which is partly right, partly wrong, “Two teenage misfits at an all-boys Catholic boarding school become unlikely comrades in a struggle against hormonal bullies and dinosaur-aged priests.”

The central character is Max (Harrison Tanner Dean), rather non-descript in appearance, aware of his gay orientation but keeping it secret, and having made a suicide attempt with tablets. He is the subject of bullying by the other boys, initially taunts, then physical attack. However, a new roommate (Quinn Gasaway) befriends him and they share conversation, Max opening up, interest in books and art.

The film opens with a sex education class, the teacher with a Roman collar but the credits simply call him Jim Linsley without reference to Reverend or Father. He is more sympathetic, talk to the boys with frankness about masturbation, but emphasising sexual activity for reproduction.

The main priest in the film is Father Alphonsus (C. Tucker Steinmetz), the Rector of the College, bearded, bear-looking big man, and big voice. “Overbearing priest.  The priest punishes students who smoke by smoking cigars with trash barrels over their heads, and even demands that two students who quarrel in the hallway must box each other in front of the whole school for humiliation on the weaker one’s part.” (Tanner Smith, Smith’s Verdict, 17 May 2014.)

He targets Max, calls him in, supervises the fight between the two boys. He sees through boys, one student refuses to write an application to the school, saying he would rather go to Hell, Father Alphonsus replies that he would not give him the pleasure of being expelled.

To counterbalance the difficulties, there is a very sympathetic nun counsellor who understands Max, his orientation and self-image, and is supportive. She asks Max which religious denomination has best mental health, citing Catholics, especially because of confession, not only its confidentiality but its opportunity for those confessing to speak frankly about themselves. The sister also urges Max to read the poems of Emily Dickenson and makes comparisons between him and her reclusive life.

Mark Thiedeman, from Arkansas where all his films are made, takes on sexual orientation themes in all his films, mainly short films, but a feature film, Last Summer, about two friends in an Arkansas town, one moving away for studies, the other, sportsman, staying comfortable in the town.

The films are not particularly explicit in showing sexual activity. Rather, the emphasis is frequently on the homoerotic gaze. And this is given something of a religious dimension by very frequent inclusion of stills of classical religious art, especially from Caravaggio. There are also a number of focus points on traditional images of the Sacred Heart. And, there is a classical music background, especially from Chopin.

The film has something of a tongue-in-cheek ending, the bully pounding Max during the fight, though Max has had some training from his friend. The climax is that Max, knocked onto the ground, suddenly pulls down his opponent’s pants and gives him a swift kick. He is a winner – comfortable then in joining the other boys in class, in exercise, in self-confidence.