PETER RABBIT 2

Australia/UK, 2021, 93 minutes, Colour.

Rose Byrne, Domhnal Gleeson, David Oyelowo. Voices of: James Corden, Margot Robbie, Elizabeth Debicki, Lenny James, Ewen Leslie, Damon Herriman, Rupert Degas, Colin Moody.
Directed by Will Gluck.

A couple of years ago, one of Beatrix Potter’s most beloved characters, Peter Rabbit, appeared on our screens, along with his cousin, Benjamin Bunny, his sisters Mopsy and Flopsy, and Cottontail (who this time discovers jellybeans and the effects of a sugar high). The rabbits and various friends live on a farm which is now owned by Thomas and Bea McGregor? (Rose Byrne and Domhnal Gleeson). Bea has written a book, Peter Rabbit, which is a commercial success and is preparing sequels.

So, this is a combination of animated characters in a live action film. And, they all blend very well indeed.

Peter can be somewhat mischievous, and Thomas has his suspicions, even misinterpreting Peter’s kind deeds to save Thomas’s tomatoes. However, when Bea discusses the sequels with her smarmy publisher, Nigel Basil Jones, played smoothly by David Oyelowo, they decide to see Peter as something of a villain, bad seed. Actually, Peter is rather exhilarated by seeing the huge posters for the book and, falls into temptation as a villain.

By and large, everything is going well at the farm, an entertaining array of animals from a foppish Fox who was persuaded not to chase the others but to go jogging! to a rather slowly enunciating deer. And, there is a fine array of actors voicing the animals, James Corden repeating his role as Peter Rabbit, but Australian voices (the film was made in New South Wales), Margot Robbie, Elizabeth Debicki, Ewen Leslie, Damon Herriman.

While the live action focuses on Bea and her books, visits to the publisher, his insinuating charm to get his own way and ideas, Thomas suspicious, and plans to have Peter and the animals dressed in jeans, go to the beach, actually go into space… But, to our relief, these stories do not eventuate.

But, there is a lot of improbable action is all the animals combine to use their skills to Ward off their enemies!

The animated action focuses on Peter being beguiled by a sinister rabbit, Barnabas (voiced by Lenny James) claiming to be his father’s friend, but scrounging on the city streets, grooming Peter to participate in a market heist, the robbery of all the contents of the stand for dried fruits! Peter succumbs to temptation, persuades all the farm animals to participate, leading to pandemonium at the market, a successful theft, but, no honour among thieves, Barnabas and his assistant cats making off with the loot.

Peter has to face himself and be humble about it, even talking to Thomas and Bea, so that there is peace back on the farm and reconciliation all round.

A pleasant, light entertainment.

1. The popularity of the Tales of Beatrix Potter? The original illustrations? Transferred to the 21st-century screen? The popularity of the original Peter Rabbit film?

2. The blend of live action and animation? Seamless? Interactions between the human characters and the animated characters? The musical score?

3. The appeal to children? The appeal to adults?

4. The Gloucestershire setting, the Mc Gregor farm, the vegetables, Thomas and his prize tomatoes? The sharing of the farm with all the animals? Thomas, his love for Bea? His background as an orphan? And his continued suspicions and roussing on Peter? Bea, love for the farm, her writing, the publication of the book, further stories? Her fondness for Peter and the animals?

5. Peter, his family, his sisters, his cousin, Cottontail – and his mischief? Their life on the farm, Cottontail and the jellybeans and the sugar high? The other animals, the Fox and his being urged to jog, the porcupine and her prickles, the badger, the deer…? Audiences enjoying the range of animals?

6. The voice cast, British and Australian voices? The creation of the characters through voice? The narration?

7. Peter and his wanting to protect the tomatoes, Thomas misjudging him, roussing on him? The visit to the market, everybody going?

8. In Gloucester, the market, the range of stalls, Peter and his getting lost, the encounter with Barnabas, Barnabas and Peter’s father, the friendship, the two cats? Testing Peter, his abilities, the possibility for stealing, their headquarters? The temptation? Peter and his returning home, enlisting the help of everyone?

9. The setting up of the stealing of the dried fruit? Everyone at the market, everybody with their task? The animosity towards the farmers? The attack, knocking everybody out? The comic style? The young girl, the dried fruit, her eyes for the boy in the store across? Distracting her? Getting the dried fruit, the reindeer and his help? Into the truck? Barnabas and the cats going off, abandoning the farm animals?

10. Barnabas revealing the truth, setting Peter up, heartless?

11. Peter, his reaction, freeing himself, reconciliation with all his friends, the comeuppance of Barnabas and the cats?

12. The live-action story, Bea and her stories, the smooth talk of Nigel Basil Jones? The phone, Cottontail suspicious? The visit to his office, his smooth talk, finances, sequels? His suggestions, the animals wearing jeans, at the beach, in space? Bea following up, the stories and sketches? Thomas and his suspicions? The visit to the board meeting, the commercialisation of the stories, Bea and her reaction?

13. Thomas, Peter talking with him, learning the truth, the reconciliation? Thomas and Bea, Peter talking?

14. Everybody going home, no more suspicions, happy on the farm?

YES DAY


US, 2021, 85 minutes, Colour.
Jennifer Garner, Edgar Ramirez, Jenna Ortega, Julian Lerner, Everly Carganilla, Tracy Thoms, Fortune Feimster, Nat Faxon, Arturo Castro, H.E.R..
Directed by Miguel Arteta

Who is the audience for Yes Day? Not older, possibly cranky, audiences who do not have children or who get irritated by children. (Unless they want to have 90 minutes of irritation.) Is this a film for parents? Well, yes, but with some cautions. They need to let themselves know that this is a blend of fantasy and reality, that they are supposed to enjoy the fantasy, imagining themselves involved in a Yes Day – but steeling themselves for the grim realities of the consequences!

Is it a a film for children? Well, yes, an opportunity to indulge in “what if…?�, Imagining that their parents might offer them a Yes Day and what that could mean.

It all starts quite enthusiastically, at least with Allison and Carlos, meeting, enjoying each other’s company, adventurous escapades, leading enthusiastically to the alter and an abundance of yes, yes, yes. Then, the years passing, three children, and Allison a very conscientious mother whose main word in her vocabulary now seems to be, No. Carlos, on the other hand, seems to be playing good parent to her perceived bad parent (at least in terms of saying no all the time to her children).

So far, so ordinary. Allison goes through job interview but is overqualified. Carlos goes to his workplace, testing toys, having to control and direct his staff. Of the children, Katie is 14 and wants to go to a concert with her friends rather than with her parents. Nando is not very good at maths but loves science and makes a video of his mother for a school project, linking her with Hitler and Mussolini… Ellie is little but not always sweetness and light.

A weary teacher, coach, school advisor suggests to the parents the idea of a Yes Day, a whole day without No. After seeing the video, Allison agrees to the day, even making a bet that she will win and will accompany Katie to the concert.

The kids (mainly with the help of the screenwriter!) devise all kinds of challenges for parental consent – to the flamboyant style of the clothes they wear, a bulk ice cream eating competition (no charge if everything is gobbled down within 30 minutes – and Carlos wins), drive-through a car washing procedure – with the windows down! Then, gathering a crowd for four teams, a paintball fight competition – which Allison wins. The parents then decide to break a travelling distance rule and go to the fair, Magic Mountain with all its rollercoasterss, rides, carousels.

Unfortunately, this is where parental example breaks down, Allison wanting to win a pink gorilla at a stall for Katie, clashes with a rival who also wants it, a fight, security, arrest, in jail.

Then things go to the worse!

Katie lets and Nando and Ellie go home where Nando has his Nerd Day, a science experiment of explosions, crowds of kids, mayhem, explosions and foam everywhere. And Katie joins up with her friends and goes to the concert, finally becoming a bit wary.

How can one top all this! Obviously, Allison goes looking for Katie, she decides that the way to appeal to Katie is to go on stage, actually getting the sympathetic help of the main singer, played by H.E.R.and, it works, with Allison and Katie on stage with the singer to great applause. Carlos goes home and, in an exemplary way, takes charge, halting the kids and their mayhem, but not letting them escape, everyone having to help with the cleanup effort.

So, some parental advice about saying yes. Some caution for children about make-believe freedom and the realities of responsibility.

And all in 85 minutes.

(Jennifer Garner worked for director, Miguel Arteta, in the family film, Alexander and the Terrible, Horrible, No Good, Very Bad Day)

AKELARRE/COVEN

Spain, 2020, 92 minutes, Colour.
Amaia Aberasturi, Alex Brendemühl, Daniel Fanego
Directed by Pablo Aguero.

Spain, 1609. Basque country, the Inquisition. (The comparison might be made with James I and his preoccupation with witches in England at the same time.)

The film opens with flames and witches being burnt alive. The Inquisitor is travelling around with the secretary and a surgeon, searching for witches, noting that 77 have been burnt, and high suspicions about the Witches Sabbath and the summoning of the devil, dancing and incantations in the woods, black masses…

In a village near the sea, where men are absent because they are sailors, we see six young women, happy in each other’s company, out in the woods and on the cliffs. They become the target of the Inquisitor, each being violently arrested, questioned, eventually tortured. They are bewildered. Inexperienced. At the interrogations, with the secretary continually taking notes, the Inquisitor is able to play with words and play with logic, tangling the young women in their responses, making them convicted themselves by their own words or by their silences.

The Inquisition trio stay at a local Inn, very demanding during meal sequence, discussing their ambitions to search out the witches and discover the truth about the Sabbaths.

The drama in the film is highlighted by one of the women, Ana, who is very shrewd, advises the young women, some of whom have been brutally tortured, head shaven, to delay until the sailors return in the following week at the full moon. During her interrogations, she is particularly shrewd, leading on the Inquisitor, appealing to his curiosity but also his sexual desires, able to invent all the details of a Sabbath (while the film shows the same words being used innocently among the young women in flashback).

The climax of the film is Ana leading the women in a verbal fantasy of a Sabbath, singing local songs, dancing and physical contortions, tantalising the Inquisitor, getting denunciations from the young inexperienced and superstitious local priest, worrying the secretary.

The women escape, run to the cliff top, pursued by the military as well as choose 13 the Inquisition, confront them, Ana advising the women to jump, the Inquisitor thinking that he will see them fly…

In the 21st-century, the film is a powerful indictment of male authority, the demeaning of women, especially with accusations of witchcraft, brutal condemnation, disgusting behaviour, cruel burning of the women alive.

1. The theme of witches and witchcraft? In the context of 17th century Spain? Europe? The Inquisition?

2. The Basque settings, the period, costumes and decor, the town, the woods, the cliff and the sea, the courtrooms, prison? The musical score?

3. Audience response to the Inquisition, its history, especially in Spain? Catholicism? The role of the king and keeping order? Memories of the Jewish presence? The Muslim presence? The expeditions to the New World, missionaries and their ships bringing back diabolical presences? Superstitions, the summoning of the devil?

4. The opening, the burning of the witches? The Inquisition team, the Inquisitor, the secretary, the surgeon? Their travelling, searching for witches? Executing 77?

5. In the town, the absence of men, the sailors at sea, expeditions to Newfoundland, flashbacks to Ana’s father sailing to this new world?

6. The focus on the young women, their ages, families, weavers, an aristocrat, a young girl? Their company?

7. Their becoming the target of the Inquisition, each of them being arrested, into the cell, their bewilderment, interactions with each other, tensions, quarrels, working together?

8. The young women themselves, their personalities, their experiences? Being taken, interrogated, their bewilderment? Some tortured, blood, head shaven? The others tending to their wounds?

9. Ana, shrewd, a response to the Inquisitor? Wanting to spin out the time until the sailors return to rescue them? The skill with words, reading the Inquisitor? Leading him on, details and descriptions, the Sabbath, the black masses, her description of the events (with the flashbacks to the young women talking amongst themselves with these words)? The excitement of the Inquisitor, the caution of the secretary? His shrewdness – Ana singing the chromatic scale and his realising that it was not an incantation?

10. The plan, the women agreeing to pretend to the Sabbath? The words, dancing, the young girl and her contortions, the singing, exciting the imagination of the Inquisitor? His curiosity? His sexual instincts? The caution of the secretary? The military and hooding Ana? The buildup to a climax?

11. The girls running away, the pursuit, at the clifftop, the military, the Inquisitor? Ana urging the others to jump? The Inquisitor thinking that he would see them fly? The audience not seeing them jump, the disappearance?

12. The role of the young priest in the village, with authorities, sitting in on the Inquisitions, becoming more outspoken, calling blasphemy, his superstitions?

13. The film as an indictment, using the images of the Inquisition in the past, of male chauvinism, Male brutality towards women?

NOBODY

US, 2021, 91 minutes, Colour.
Bob Oden Kirk, Connie Neilson, Christopher Lloyd, Aleksey Serebryakov, Michael Ironside, Colin Salmon, RZA.
Directed by Ilya Nailshuller.

It doesn’t come as a surprise to learn that the writer for this violent, action show is Derek Kolstad, the writer for all the John Wick actioners. The central character, moving towards the end of middle age, is called Hutch Mansell, played by Bob Oden Kirk, best known for television series like Better Call Saul and Breaking Bad, a longtime screen writer with a talent for comedy.

Thinking about John Wick and his violent career, hitman, high body count, one might conclude that this is a version of John Wick Sr, the hitman getting an opportunity to career change, drop the violence completely (well, not exactly completely) and his becoming a husband and father with a regular work routine. In fact, the film begins very well with a quick outline and visuals of each day of Hutch’s week, including missing out on getting the garbage bin out on time for the collector (and wondering why he doesn’t put it out the night before as most of us do), the signalling of the days of the weeks getting faster and faster.

Hutch’s life is routine, but becoming more than a touch frigid in his relationship with his wife, Rebecca (Connie Neilson) a professional woman. His teenage son doesn’t seem to think all that much of him. But he is devoted to his little daughter.

And then, two masked burglars turn up, the son tackling one of them, Hutch restraining himself from smashing a golf club on the female burglar’s head. The son is not impressed.

In the meantime, Hutch has some ambitions to take over his wife’s father’s family business where he works. And he goes to visit his ex-FBI agent father, played with enormous vigour, as we see by the end, by Christopher Lloyd, relishing his role, in a home for the elderly.

Determining that he will assert himself more strongly, especially for his son’s admiration, he tracks down the burglars only to find they had some reasonable cause for the burglary. But, it is on the way home, on a bus, that he encounters a group of reckless young men who have crashed their car, get on the bus, menace the few passengers – and then provoke Hutch. His repressed inner rage breaks out, helped by his military training in the past. He is on the receiving end of a lot of hits and punches himself, but, in bone-crunching way, he wins the night.

We might expect that there are consequences and there are, tangling with the Russian Mafia, a most obnoxious villain who dresses showily, snorts cocaine, sings on stage in his nightclub, supervises millions of dollars of illegal cash – and has henchman galore at his beckoning.

If this sounds interesting and provocative, then Nobody is your show, a lot of action, a lot of ingenuity with weapons, some huge shootouts. A lot of this is done tongue-in-cheek, hyperbole, to say the least. And, continually in the background is a range of popular songs, lyrics apt for the action, including Louis Armstrong and What a Wonderful World as his house burns to the ground, To Dream the Impossible Dream at the height of the shooting, and I’ll Never Walk Alone from Carousel during the climax. Actually, there is a happy ending, of course, with Let the Good Times Roll over the final credits!

Hutch proves that he is not exactly a Nobody even if that is the name in his highly secret government file.

1. The title? Expectations? Hutch’s response to the interrogators? His name in the secret file?

2. The city of Winnipeg, city sequences, in the city, streets, clubs, suburbs, homes? The bus? Car chases? The warehouse? Musical score?

3. The work of the writer, the tradition of John Wick? The silent hero? Background, martial arts skills? The hero in middle age?

4. The tantalising opening, Hutch, the interrogation, feeding the cat, Nobody?

5. The device of the days of the week, Hutch’ rutine, the detail, home, work, the garbage bin…, Speeding up of the days, the weeks, highlighting the routine?

6. Hutch, his work, his brother-in-law and the threats, his father-in-law and wanting to buy the business? Later offering him the gold? The acceptance? His taking over the plant, preparing the weapons, preparing the trap’s? The climax in the warehouse?

7. Hutch and Rebecca, the coldness of the marriage? The son and his critique of his father? The little girl? The burglary, Hutch and his reaction, the son tackling the thief, Hutch and the golf club, not hitting? The escape? The reaction the next morning?

8. Hutch, his past, the years of the marriage, self-correction? Indications of his past? His going to find the burglars, the tattooes, the visit to the salons, the information, the visit to the home, the husband and wife, the ill baby, his letting them go?

9. The bus, the crashed car, the young men and their rowdiness, the girl passenger, the bus driver? Hutch going into action, his skills, yet his being punched and bloodied? Some going to the hospital? His return home? Rebecca’s puzzle?

10. The night club, the Russians, the owner, cocaine, clothes, singing on stage, his types, the revelation of his managing the cash? The black Russian as henchmen? The news of the attack, the visit to his son in hospital? Vengeance? Information, tracking down Hutch? The contact with Washington, the blackmail for the official, his searching out the document, the researcher walking away?

11. The attack on the house, Hutch putting the family in the basement, then getting them to safety? The house burning down? The attack, the shooting, his neighbours flash card, the pursuit, the crashes, beginning to fill his story to the Ethiopian Russian?

12. The Russian, vengeance, the large number of gangsters, the attack?

13. His father, in the home, the FBI background, Hutch taking his badge? His stash of weapons? The photo, the father and the two brothers, the black brother? His calling on them, contact with his brother radio, the coming to the warehouse?

14. Hutch having his meal in the club, the threat of the bomb? The pursuit?

15. The attack on the warehouse, the invasion, the many men, shootings and death, the traps? Hutch’s father, his brother and their involvement? The final confrontation with the Russian, Hutch and his destruction of the warehouse and burning the cash, the fight, the bomb and explosion?

16. The aftermath, the family, the new house, the basement?

17. The use of songs throughout the film, for key events, tone and lyrics? Especially that Hutch not be misunderstood!

SUPERNOVA

UK, 2020, 95 minutes, Colour.
Colin Firth, Stanley Tucci, Hayward, Peter Mac Queen.
Directed by Harry Mac Queen.

The supernova can serve as a bright metaphor for human life. As we see in the opening credits, gazing at the stars in the sky, gradually multiplying and multiplying, bright stars, and a supernova at the centre, flaring vividly, then disappearing, dying.

So the image is used for one of the two central characters of this two-handed drama, the story of the final times of a long-term relationship between the men, Sam and Tusker. Each of them has, in his own way, publicly, Tusker as a published novelist, Sam as a concert pianist, have had their moments of brightness. Now, Tusker is terminally ill.

Basically, the framework of the narrative is a road trip. And an opportunity to visit the range of vistas in the English countryside, the roads, the fields, the mountains, and visits to country homes. Tusker has organised the itinerary. Sam does the practical work, packing, driving, shopping. And the immediate destination is the family home of Sam’s sister, a stopover on the road trip.

Sam is played by Colin Firth, always a strong and reliable screen presence. Tall and strong, he seems to tower over his co-star, Stanley Tucci, who plays Tusker. And the point of the road trip is that Tusker has been diagnosed with the onset of dementia, gradually taking him over, difficulties in memory, confusion in physical coordination, unable physically to write or do up shirt buttons. And, he can be cantankerous, even with Sam, despite their decades of being together.

One of the main issues is the depiction of the onset of dementia, the gradual physical manifestations, the psychological manifestations, difficulties in communication, and depression consequences, even to the consideration of suicide, not wanting to be the object of pity when all consciousness memories of the past have gone. The screenplay does raise the issues of palliative care, possibilities of life for the person experiencing dementia. The screenplay raises the issue of personal decisions, the reasons for taking one’s own life.

And, the other issue is the role and responsibilities of the carer, and a lifetime of love which motivates the caring, prepared to look after the partner whatever the gradual and long-term deterioration.

Which means that there are some moving and challenging conversations throughout the film between the two men. When they stop at Sam’s sister’s house, there are further discussions, especially during a surprise party, longtime relatives and friends being supportive and caring.

There is also a musical motif throughout the film, excerpts from quite a number of songs, but the playing of a piano piece by Edward Elgar, culminating in the public performance by Sam in a concert.

Films like Supernova raise for the audience, the realities of the onset of dementia, the consequences for the person concerned, for relatives and friends, and for the moral choices to be made.

A helpful reference on dementia is the film, released at the same time, The Father, with a powerful performance by Anthony Hopkins bewildered by his experience of dementia.

1. The title? A supernova flaming, then dying? The visuals for the opening credits, the sky, the stars, the supernova, bright, disappearing? The final images of the sky, Sam lying, looking at the sky?

2. The title as a symbol for Tusker and his life?

3. The English settings, the roads, the countryside, fields, mountains, country homes? Interiors? The musical score? The Elgar theme?

4. Sam and Tusker, late 50s, their long relationship? Tusker and his novels? Sam, the piano? Their characters, interactions, Tusker planning the trip, Sam agreeing? The plan, Sam’s concert, the bonding between them?

5. Tusker’s illness, prognosis, gradual dementia? Loss of memory? Physical and abilities, to write, do up buttons…? Tusker and his acceptance? The revelation that he had bought pills to commit suicide? His not wanting any advice on further medication? His love for Sam, erratic moods, walking from the supermarket with the dog? The challenge of writing a novel, his not being able to write, literally?

6. Sam, personality, love for Tusker, prepared to care for him? Driving the van, packing everything? His reaction to Tusker during the trip, his comments, not talking, falling asleep? The set up in the van, comforts, travel? Sam worried when Tusker walked off with the dog?

7. The destination, Sam and his sister, the family, the welcome, the surprise party and all the guests, the conversations, each having the need to go outside? Sam and the discussions with Tim, Tim’s revelation about Tusker’s inability to write?

8. The family, the welcome, the dinner conversation, the warmth of the relationships? The farewell to Tusker?

9. On the road again, the issue of the country house, to go home again or not, Tusker wanting the country house? Their settling in?

10. The conversations between the two, Sam and his discovery of the truth, Tusker’s scribble in his book, the pills, confronting Tusker? Tusker and his explanations, not wanting to be the object of pity, for Sam having to care for him?

11. Sam, playing the piano, the Elgar, Tusker liking it? Sam and his resignation? Tusker and his resignation? Sam lying and looking at the sky?

12. The concert, the Elgar, in memory of Tusker?

13. The issues of relationships, the gay relationship for many decades, the quality of a loving relationship?

14. Issues of illness, dementia, medication, palliative care, suicide?

COLECTIV/ COLLECTIVE

Romania, Germany, Luxembourg, 2019, 115 minutes, Colour.
Catalin Tolontan, Vlad Voiculescu, Tedy Ursuleanu.
Directed by Alexandre Nanau.

A documentary with many nominations and awards. A number of commentators suggest that it is one of the best films about investigative journalism. It certainly keeps the attention.

This is a Romanian story. The title, with its overtones of Soviet collectivism and society, also refers to a nightclub in Bucharest where, in 2015, a fire broke out, no fire exits which led to 27 victims in the fire and 37 for the victims dying in hospital from burns. At one point, some footage of the actual fire and panic is included in the film.

The first part of the film and the director’s investigation focuses on a journalist from the Sports Gazette who begins to investigate the causes of the fire and its consequences. There are many scenes in the press room is and offices, the journalist, Catalin Tolontan, seen working with his colleagues, discussions, phone calls, contacts, publishing… And, there are many sequences of press conferences with: Tolontan asking questions. And, Romanian journalist, at least in this context, ask some very demanding questions – demanding Lee.

One of the main targets of the questions is the Health Minister. What emerges is, and dramatised with footage of protests and demonstrations against the ministry and the authorities, and with comments and questions by parents and relatives of those who died, is a mess of political and social corruption.

The film also focuses on one of the victims of the fire, Teddy Ursuleanu, who agreed to a series of photographs graphically illustrating the injuries on herself, photographs that were exhibited in a Gallery, with interviews about her survival and her looking forward in life rather than recriminations and regrets.

Perhaps it is the long tradition of the Soviet rule and corruption in Romania, but many audiences will be shocked at the mismanagement of the hospitals, the limitation of burns units, the need for victims to be transferred to Vienna for appropriate treatment. But, mismanagement also emerges, political patronage, bribery for accreditation ignoring standards, the role of bribery, even for doctors…

The second part of the film, also interesting, focuses on a new Minister of Health, Vlad Voiculescu, in his early 30s, who allowed the filmmakers unlimited access to his office, his political discussions, investigations into the health corruption, his press conferences.

At the end of the film, there are elections in Romania, the minister discussing the dire results for his re-election with his father, the Social Democrats who had fostered a great deal of corruption, being returned.

Which means then that those who do not know recent Romanian history, some Googling for further information.

1. The nations and rewards? Critical acclaim?

2. Audience knowledge of this period in Romanian history, culture, politics? Enough information given throughout the film? The need for further information?

3. Bucharest, 2015, the city, the nightclub, the footage of the fire, hospitals, wards, footage of suffering patients? Press conferences, ministers offices, the press, reporters offices? The musical score?

4. The title? The reference to the club and the disaster? 27 dying in the fire, 37 dying of burns afterwards?

5. The overtones of the title in English, Soviet Union backgrounds, society?

6. The information about the fire, footage, the disaster, the victims, in hospital, grieving parents? Protests, the gatherings, the numbers, the media, the complaints? The views of particular parents, at the meetings? The final visit to the grave and the image of the dead son? The family ritual?

7. Catalin Tolentan, sports reporter, interest in the fire, reporting, beginning to investigate, his associates at the paper, the details of their work, interviews, consultations, phone calls, publication…? Tolentan as a character, seeing him at work, in the interviews, his questions, his stances?

8. The revelations about hospital administration? The issue of the disinfectants, targeting the international pharmaceutical company, responsibilities, corporate fraud, sales, discounts, diluting the disinfectants, the role of the doctors, hospital administration, nurses and associates, the issue of money, political favouritism, bribes to doctors…?

9. The detailed investigative journalism, hospital administrations, the Minister for Health, his background, press conferences, the tough questions, his responses, revelations of truth, his resignation, suicide?

10. The pursuit of the corrupt administrator, taking him, his abuse of the staff, the women testifying against him, his arrival, arrest, the press? Symptomatic?

11. The sequences with Tedy Ursuleanu, the severity of burns, the close-ups, the posing for the photos, the exhibition, the reception, her positive attitude in looking forward to life without regrets and recriminations?

12. Voiculesco, his becoming Minister for Health, his openness, the film crew at all the meetings, personal meetings, press conferences, political discussions? The role of his advisers? The information? The denunciation by the Mayor of Bucharest and her demanding lung transplants at the hospital, the issue of its accreditation, fraudulent, the professor on the phone and his wanting the issue covered?

13. The personality of the Minister, in his early 30s, competent, political, integrity? Toll of Tedy Ursuleanu prominent on his wall?

14. The election, campaigning, the heavy defeat the interim government, the return of the Social Democrats, their past record, political and financial corruption? The minister and his talking to his father about the election?

15. The film stopping, Romanian audiences knowing what happened? International audiences having to do further consultation about the minister and his career?

THE COURIER

UK, 2020, 112 minutes, Colour.
Benedict Cumberbatch, Merab Ninidze, Rachel Brosnahan, Jesse Buckley, Angus Wright, Anton Lesser.
Directed by Dominic Cooke.

This is a 60 years retrospect. The action takes place in the early 1960s – the atmosphere of the times, Cold War, tension between the Soviet Union in the US, nuclear acceleration, Russian planting missiles in Cuba facing the US, the October 1962 missiles crisis. The film offers an opportunity to reflect on those times, the potential consequences, subsequent history, the collapse of the Soviet Union, 21st century relationships between the US and Russia.

For some, this might be a visit to what one could call John Le Carre territory, British espionage, Cold War undercover, relationship with the Americans, possible Soviet defections.

And, it is based on actual characters and events – with a welcome clip before the final credits of an interview with the central character, British salesmen and businessmen, Greville Wynne.

The initial focus is on Nikita Kruschev, sequences of his ranting to the Soviet authorities, his eagerness to develop nuclear weapons. Amongst the audience is a war hero, Oleg Penkovsky, played by long-time Russian actor, Meran Nidinze, credible in the role of an official with access to military information, who is dismayed by Kruschev, wants peace and is prepared to send information to the UK and the US.

Which leads to the courier of the title. MI6 and the US receive a message from Ben cops and decide that the best way to get information from him is to get a non-political businessmen to promote his company in Russia, travel frequently, make contact with Penkovsky (wearing a tie pin that is the indication for contact), befriend him, received documentation and deliver it – without knowing any detail of what the documentation contained. The liaison is with a CIA agent, played by Rachel Brosnahan, who is controlled by CIA chiefs in Washington.

Benedict Cumberbatch is at his best as Greville Wynne, initially surprised by the proposal, going through with it, becoming very friendly with Penkovsky, welcoming a Russian trade delegation to London, inviting Penkovsky, to a meal with his family.

Most of us are unfamiliar with the outcome of Greville Wynne’s activities and the fate of Oleg Penkovsky. We are led into the world of KGB suspicions, surveillance, poisonings, arrests, imprisonment, cruel prison conditions.

On the other hand, there is Wynne’s relationship with his wife, Sheila (another good role for Jessie Buckley), his secrecy, gradual Revelation Is – and his being seen as something of a British hero.

For older audiences, some of whom lived through these episodes, it is a fascinating retrospect. For younger audiences, it serves as an introduction to the tensions of the Cold War and a reminder that at all times there are similar kinds of espionage activities taking place – and now.

1. Based on actual events and characters? The clip of Wynne before the final credits?

2. A cold war story? The early 1960s? The Kruschev era? The Kennedy era? Nuclear tensions? World supremacy? Cuba, the Cuban crisis? The dangers of the time? Seen in retrospect?

3. The focus on Kruschev, his speeches, August 1960, the threats, nuclear weapons? The applause from the assembly? The focus on Penkovsky? The Berlin Wall and Kennedy’s speech? The Cuban missiles? Kruschev and his accent, Cuba? Kennedy and the 13 Days?

4. The character of Penkovsky, his war heroism and decorations, reputation, his position, affirmation by Kruschev (the nod at the ballet)? On a personal level, his wife and daughter, accommodation? On the ideological level? Opposed to Kruschev, nuclear weapons, wanting peace, the decision to give the information to the Americans, the two young men in the subway, the message, to the American embassy?

5. The American response, the information, documents, the meeting between Emily and MI6, the discussions, the strategy for contact with Penn Koski? To choose a salesman, not politically connected, to act as a courier, not knowing details of the political issues?

6. The introduction to Greville Wynne, the golf course, missing the put on purpose, business? Personality, age, drinking, the past marital betrayal and forgiveness? Wife and son? The domestic sequences?

7. Wynne and his meeting with Emily (as Helen), MI6, the discussions, the gradual proposal? His complying? Wearing the pin? The plan for business expansion in the Soviet Union? Flying to Moscow, the meetings, the pin, meeting Penkovsky?

8. The frequent visits to Russia, the growing friendship with Penovsky, the visit to the ballet, meals, talking, carrying the information?

9. The visit to London of the trade delegation, the drinking, hospitality, Penkovsky having the meal with the family? The gift for Andrew?

10. The visits to London, the increasing information about Berlin, missiles, Cuba, threats, Kennedy on television?

11. Penkovsky at home, his work, his pregnant wife? The visit by the Kremlin official? Praise for the past? His work, collapse in the office, later revealed as being poisoned? Hospital? Surveillance on Penkovsky, searching his home, the documentation?

12. Penkovskyi, his methods of getting the documentation, photographing them, giving them to Wynne, his depositing them at the embassy?

13. The issue of defection to the west, the plan, MI6 advising against, Emily and her support, Wynne ready to go back to Russia? The plan, the escape route on the map? Penkovsky preparing, his wife? Wynne back on the plane? The van, Emily pursued, taken, persona non grata? Wynne ordered off the plane?

14. Penkovsky, arrest, interrogation, the dismay of his wife and daughter? The explanation that he had been under surveillance, everything observed and filmed, tapes? His imprisonment?

15. Wynne, imprisonment, hair shaved, body search, the cell, the stench, the window? Two years of imprisonment? Interrogations, pleading innocence? The exercise, his becoming weaker, the limited food, the soup?

16. Sheila, her support of her husband, puzzled by his behaviour, the sexual episode? His moods? The camp, anger at Andrew? Suspicions? The past? Emily visiting, part revelation, part secrecy? Sheila having to feign innocence? Her friend and neighbour and the discussions? Her visit to Russia? Her giving her husband information about Cuba?

17. Penkovsky, the final visit to Wynne, supporting each other, Wynne giving him the information about Cuba, indicating his success in the moved towards backing down and peace? The news of his execution?

18. Wynne, the return home, the media? The glimpse of the actual Wynne?

19. Cold War espionage, stances of the Soviet Union, of the US, nuclear dangers, backed towns, 60 years in retrospect?

TELL IT TO THE BEES

UK, 2018, 108 minutes, Coloour.
Anna Paquin, Holliday Grainger, Gregor Selkirk, Kate Dickie, Emun Elliott, Euan Mason. Narration by Billy Boyd.
Directed by Annabel Jankel.

A film adaptation of a popular novel, focusing on Scotland and the working class in 1952, focusing on relationships, family, sexual relationships, lesbianism.

The title and what is told to the bees are personal secrets. This serves as a kind of metaphorical motif, many sequences of tending the bees, the hives, the honey, their being loose, swarming… And the young boy of this narrative learning that you tell secrets to the bees, that they hear, that they have influence, illustrates this telling secrets – and a number of sequences where he does this.

The setting is a mill town in Scotland in the early 1950s. Many people work at the local mill, especially the women. We are introduced to Lydia (a strong performance from Holliday Grainger) who had married during the war, some flashbacks to their meeting and the exhilaration of dancing, but the husband has suffered during the war and has abandoned his wife and seven-year-old son, Charlie (an arresting performance by Gregor Selkirk). She has little income, she runs the danger of being evicted from the house, her work is humdrum.

Across the field from their house is a mansion – with bees and hives. It emerges that it is the house of Dr Jean Markham (Anna Paquin in a strong performance). She is friendly to Charlie, allowing him to come to see the bees, his mother upset when she discovers that the doctor has given Charlie a book and invited him to the house, going over in high dungeon, only to find that the doctor is a woman.

There are dramatic moments, especially with the doctor, having come from the village in the past, her father being the local doctor and owner of the mansion, and her trying to establish her practice, feeling her family with the death of a child. Other dramatic moments include Lydia encountering her angry husband, she and Charlie being evicted, their being taken in by Jean.

While audiences would have been alerted to Jean’s sexual orientation and her attraction to Lydia, the latter part of the film focuses on the relationship, the reaction of people in the town, the couple wanting this to be secret, Charlie wanting always the truth from his mother and feeling he was deceived, running away to his father and his father’s family, precipitating an emotional crisis.

The resolution is not quite as expected. There is a plan that the family should go to Canada. There is a crisis with a cousin who has become pregnant by her boyfriend, a black man, and the family organise and impose an abortion. With the woman almost dead, there is a plea for the doctor to come and help – which she does. She does not go to Canada because she feels she should stop running – and farewells Lydia and Charlie as they leave.

The narration, by Billy Boyd, is done by the older Charlie.

1. The title? The visuals of the bees and hives and the honey? The metaphor? Telling secrets to the bees? Their reaction, communication?

2. The Scottish setting, the town, the early 1950s, working class, harshness, poverty? The streets, the interiors? Lydia’s house, more comfortable? The doctor’s mansion? The visuals of the mills, the work, the women? (The flashbacks to dancing during the war years?)

3. Lydia, her age, working at the mill, supervisory role, cigarette breaks, walking home, her cousin, the friendships and the talk? At home, Charlie, the bond between mother and son? The danger of being evicted? The visit of Robert, the memories of the past, his leaving, in the town with his family, her love for him? His impositions? The experience of Charlie invited by the doctor, the loan of the book, her being upset, going to the mansion, discovering the doctor was Jean? The growing friendship? Books, conversations, Charlie and his visits to the bees?

4. Jean, her severe manner, doctor’s qualifications, coming from the village, leaving, her father, her studies, the selling of the house, her coming to work in the town, her office, people’s hesitations, the little girl and her illness, dying, Jean blaming herself? Jean and her friend, his devotion in the past, widower, his daughter? The discussions? The visit to the house, the meal? Jean visiting and his advice, legal advice?

5. Lydia and Charlie, evicted, being taken in by Jean, the comfortable rooms, the run of the house, Lydia and her hard work, Charlie and the bees, Jean and her work?

6. Mother and son, the pledge to tell each other the truth, Charlie and his gradual discovery of his mother’s relationship with Jean? With his friend in the woods, the finding of the bra, watching the lovers? The friends, and about Jean being a Dirty Dyke? Charlie, at seven, hurling the name at his mother? His running away to his father?

7. Jean and Lydia, the attraction, gradual for Lydia, Jean and the attraction, the relationship? Wanting secrecy?

8. Lydia, at work, the accident, her being sacked, drinking in the pub, Charley seeing her, her return home?

9. Robert, his anger, wanting Charlie, Charlie at the house, the abortion issue, Robert and his anger, Charlie running away? Robert coming to the house, finding Lydia? Locking the door, the rape, the fight? His hitting the hives, the bees and their swarming, even into the room?

10. Lydia, protecting Charlie? Jean and her being called by the family to help after the abortion, her saving the girl’s life? The family indebted – and wanting her to return?

11. The issue of Canada, the final decision, Jean not wanting to run away, Lydia and Charlie to go to Canada, that there was a station, the open kiss of the station?

12. The older Charlie as narrator and his perspective is on these experiences?

PILI

UK, 2017, 85 minutes, Colour.
Bello Rashid.
Directed by Leanne Welham.

Pili is the name of a woman living in a village in Tanzania. Her husband has left her when he discovered that she was HIV positive. He himself refused to test. She discovered her state when giving birth to her daughter, who is not infected. She also has a son who goes to school.

The film was made by British woman director, bringing great sensitivity to this portrayal of a middle-aged woman, trapped in poverty in her village, ashamed to let people know that she is HIV, scraping a living for her family by working as a farmer in the fields. However, she is also very strong minded, bonding with her friends, rather prickly with those who intrude into her privacy.

The film shows her getting an opportunity to buy a small kiosk in the village. Much of the action shows her trying to raise the money, especially an appeal to a women’s committee in the village, the chair of the committee very strong on laying down the letter of the law and obeying protocols, putting barriers to the loan. Pili struggles, has run out of her medication for HIV, tries to get more, prices having gone up in the village, going to a medical centre at a distance so she will not be recognised, trying to get back to the village for the final meeting about the money approval.

Just when the audience is expecting something of a happy ending, when Pila goes to visit the man who can give her the line since the kiosk and his seem sympathetic, he demands a sexual relationship with her before he gives the license and some compensation in the price.

At the end of the film, Pili is more honest about her state of health, has recovered somewhat, has the kiosk and is now prospering, the audience seeing her selling her goods at her kiosk – while her friend from the fields waves and the camera looks at the woman walking along the highway, the long highway to the farm.

An important contribution to Tanzanian consciousness but also to world consciousness about hardships in life for women in Africa.

1. The title? The focus on Pili? Her age, HIV status, her husband abandoning her, the little daughter, the young son at school, her working in the fields? The possibility for buying the kiosk? Her struggle to get the money?

2. A portrait of an African woman, Tanzania, impact for the African audience, for a worldwide audience and this portrait of a woman in an African village?

3. The visuals of the village, people’s house, the broken door, the interiors, poor? The streets of the village? Meeting places? The long highway to the fields, work in the fields? The visit to clinics, pharmacies, the doctors? Bus travel? The musical score and background?

4. The portrait of Pili, age, health, the broken door, the nosy neighbour and her reactions, her other friends, the importance of the mobile phone and possibilities of the calls and communication, her little boy and going to school, paying for books, the neighbour looking after the little girl? The long walk to the fields, the hard work, her friends, conversation, the kindly man with the food, sharing it with her friend? The prospects of life with work in the fields?

5. The free kiosk, her asking to have the lease, the man and his demands, allowing her to find the money? Her own money, in the house, ordinary expenses? Going to the meeting, some of the women agreeing to the request, the chair of the meeting and her hard line? The votes? The further meetings, her being delayed at the doctors, the bus breaking down, arriving, the final vote, the casting vote?

6. Pili and her children, caring for the little girl, the boy and his feeling that his mother was too much away?

7. Getting the money, going to the owner, his seeming kindness and friendliness, his decision against her? His change, the sexual demands, allowing her some of the deposit?

8. Her acquiescing, the kiosk, seeing her with the sales, her health improved, her clothes? Her prosperity – but the cost?

ORDINARY LOVE

UK, 2019, 92 minutes, Colour.
Lesley Manville, Liam Neeson, David Wilmot, Amit Shah.
Directed by Lisa Barros D’ Sa, Glenn Leyburn.

Ordinary love can be found everywhere, but sometimes in great crises.

This is a story of a middle-aged husband-and-wife (who had the extra tragedy in the death of their young adult daughter), seen initially (and throughout the film as well as at the end) doing their daily exercise walk along the beachfront. They are Tom and Joan, very ordinary names. And they are played by Lesley Manville and Liam Neeson.

This is definitely a film that will speak to middle-aged women. It is definitely a film that will speak to middle-aged men. And, it can be said that it is a film that will speak to middle-aged couples.

We see Tom and Joan at home, their ordinary lives, memories of the past, sharing the ordinary domestic activities as meals, television, showers, going to sleep… But, in the shower, Joan discerns a lump in her breast.

The film has many visits to the hospital, scans and MRI, discussions with doctors, questions, queries, hopes, disappointments, chemotherapy and its consequences… And this takes its toll on both of them, Joan and the uncertainties and pain, some desperate wanting relief, impatience with Tom, while Tom feels that he is doing his best, perhaps a bit much of avoidance, falls optimism, exasperation but a continued devotion.

There is a small subplot concerning Peter, a former teacher of their daughter who has terminal cancer. He and Joan become friends, shared conversations, the teachers partner, Steve, staying always in the cafeteria, unable to be with him despite his love. There are some conversations between Tom and Steve, a great deal of pathos, commentating in Peter’s death and the funeral service and Steve’s speech.

Some audiences may find the subject and the treatment difficult going, but it is an opportunity to acknowledge the reality of cancer and illness that touches everyone, every family.

1. The title? The importance of love? To be found everywhere? In ordinary situations? The ordinary situation of middle-aged marriage, illness, cancer, treatment, the demands on love and support?

2. The settings, along the beachfront, home and interiors, ordinary, hospital visits, scans and MRI, doctor’s interview rooms? The night at the hotel? The musical score?

3. Ordinary lives, Joan and Tom in middle age, at home with each other, television, meals, mundane realities? Background of the loss of their daughter, the photos?

4. Joan, the shower, the lump in her breast, Tom’s reaction, their going to the doctor, appointments, scans, verdicts, uncertainties, confirmation of cancer, the growth in the breast, leading to mastectomy, possibilities of breast reconstruction? The realities of chemotherapy, physical illness, pain, loss of hair, Tom and the haircut, Joan and her wigs, too hot, being bald? The passing of time, the effect on Joan, desperation, irritation, anger at Tom, the fight? Her being sorry? In the wards, the patient with her advice about chemotherapy, the young woman going into surgery?

5. Tom, bluff man, love for Joan, ironic humour, accompanying Jonah and supporting her, optimism, strong demands for clarity from the doctors, mixed feelings about how to deal with Joan? Excepting the realities, accompanying her to the hospital, sitting with her, her pain, the pain killers, the bitter verbal fight about hating each other? Cutting her hair, her baldness? His acceptance of the situation? The special night at the hotel, the meal, sexual encounter, the future?

6. Joan recognising Peter, the discussion with him, teaching their daughter, his terminal cancer, his partner, Steve, unwilling to be in the ward? Tom and his conversations with Peter? Going to the cafeteria, the discussions with Steve?

7. Peter, teaching, his illness, gay man, relationship with Steve, Steve and his support but unable to go into the ward? Stephen his declaration of his love for Peter to Tom?

8. The funeral, Steve’s speech?

9. Joan, recovery, the motif of the couple walking along the beachfront, the sapling, growing again, the symbol of the walk on the sapling at the end?