THE REPORT

US, 2019, 120 minutes, Colour.
Adam Driver, Annette Bening, Jon Hamm, Linda Powell, Corey Stoll, Scott Shepherd, Maura Tierney, Michael C.Hall, Sarah Goldberg, Douglas Hodge, T.Ryder Smith, Tim Blake Nelson, Ted Levine, Jennifer Morrison, Kate Beahan, Matthew Rhys.
Directed by Scott Z. Burns.

Or, perhaps the full title, The Torture Report, but with the word “Torture� redacted with whiteout as happens during the opening credits – redaction being rather significant as the film progresses!

This is the kind of film that this reviewerI would enjoy seeing at any time. The intricacies of politics, especially American politics are always intriguing. And, these years, it does not take very long after the events for behind-the-scenes intrigues and machinations to become the theme of popular films – though it was only two years between Nixon’s resignation and All the President’s Men. In more recent years, there have been W, Vice, Zero Dark Thirty. Fair Game.

But, what makes it even more significant for me, is that it was released in the very weeks that the impeachment of Donald Trump was being voted on. How revelatory is The Report for behind these days’ headlines?

In the meantime, here is the CIA, the exercise of torture from 2002 in the wake of 9/11 and the war against terror until 2008 and its being banned by President Obama. As we think, plent to think about as we watch, we are made to realise how much goes on behind the scenes, in the various departments, in the Congress, in the White House, the number of documents, the reports, the redactions, secrecy and security, personal rivalries, protecting of jobs and reputations, increasing carelessness of and/or admitting or covering the truth.

So, for the present, a good film to try to understand what might have been going on during Donald Trump’s initial years, the investigation into Russian interference, the frequent resignations of officials in the administration, the events which led to a impeachment – to be recommended.

Adam Driver’s performance as investigator Daniel Jones is excellent. He is listed as an advisor. He is the embodiment of an intensely principled American, completely dedicated to his work (but no real personal life to speak of), tempted to be a whistleblower, disgusted with the coverups, relentless in his examination of documents, making connections, wanting the truth to be told no matter what. And Annette Bening gives an excellent performance as Senator Diane Feinstein from California, Daniel Jones’ boss, but also to be seen as something of counterbalance. Not that she did not want truth to be revealed, but she was very conscious in her political life of the need for shrewd decision-making and the implications and consequences of politicking.

There is reference to Zero Dark Thirty and the CIA information which led to the attack on Osama Bin Laden. That film also had scenes of torture, bringing to our consciousness the issue and violence of waterboarding. In the early sequences, there is little holding back on indicating the range of tortures that were permitted, the limited medical con-men who sold the CIA on torture, and the vast amount of money spent on it, and the very limited information on future terrorist attacks that it elicited from the victims. As with the torture, there are the grim scenes where CIA officials rather callously watch and concur in the torture, using the principle that the end justifies the means.

There is also a reference to Edward Snowden (remembering Oliver Stone’s portrait of Snowden) and we think of Julian Assange and Chelsea Manning, a reminder of some of the truths that they revealed and deceptions played on the American public and on the world’s public.

As they say, “All will be Revealed�, the revelation may not be immediate but, with communications so complex these days, with human motivation so entangled, but with the hope that there is integrity in truth, so much will be revealed sooner rather than later.

1. The title? The redacted “torture� with whiteout?

2. Audience knowledge of American torture after 9/11, the investigations, the writing of reports, revelations in Congress? Obama forbidding torture? Audience stances, pro-American, anti-American? The impact of 9/11, the war on terror, the Bush administration and Dick Cheney and others, the role of the CIA?

3. Issues of torture of prisoners, Geneva Conventions, history of torture in the 20th century, Nazis, Latin American…? The decision for America to use torture? The roles of James Mitchell and Bruce Jessen? Their backgrounds? Qualifications – and lack, ordinary payouts to them? The attitudes of the authorities? Seeing the action? The details, naked, cold, hanging by wrists, loud music, waterboarding…? Death? The information gathered, the talk of imminent attacks, the indication that this information led to Osama bin Laden?

4. The original article base for this film, Rorschach and Awe? Daniel Jones as advisor to the film?

5. The use of the time chart, from 9/11 to the end of the Obama administration? As illustrated on screen?

6. Adam Driver as Daniel Jones, the introduction, his law studies, going to Denis Mc Donough for advice, to get experience, CIA and intelligence? His appointment to the committee, the patronage of Senator Weinstein, the investigation, the allotted room, the security, his mandate, the limits, the small staff and his working with them, intensity, the woman intending to leave to have a family life, his associate and himself and their torture dreams? Jones as a character, no life of his own, committed, his conscience, the temptation to be a whistleblower?

7. The picture of torture, the CIA officers and their presence, male and female, wanting information, hesitations about the torture, the aims, the law, the end justifying the means? The continued stances, official inquiries? Supported by the CIA?

8. Diane Weinstein, Annette Bening’s performance? Reference to her experience in California, the assassination of Harvey Milk, her work in the Senate, threats to her daughter? Strong, efficient, her reliance on her assistant and her quiet presence and help? Daniel and his job? Documents, the details? The political background and the need for concessions and compromises? The Senate hearings for appointing Brennan as head of the CIA? Krass and her interrogation? The arguments? The senators, Republicans and Democrats, frustrations? The justice Department, the Senate and the hacking of the Senate website, the White House? Her decisions, political nous, the speech in Congress, Sen John Mc Cain, the power, her party?

9. Denis Mc Donough, the initial advice, the later contact, out jogging? Discussions with Daniel? Supervising the Caucus meeting, the political implications of the revealing of the document?

10. Senator Udall, his speaking out, questions, his political defeat? The portrait of other senators and their interrogations? Political stances? Moral stances?

11. Daniel going to the lawyer, the interrogation, careful with his words, the relocating of the manuscript, the lawyer giving advice that political revelation would be better?

12. Contacting the New York Times, the journalist, his reputation, the meetings, giving him the information, the writing of the article? The possibilities?

13. Issues of whistleblowers, reference to Edward Snowden, memories of Julian Assange, Chelsea Manning? Risks, imprisonment? Political enmity is?

14. Daniel and staying with integrity, Senator Weinstein’s reaction, the manuscript, her speech, Senator Mc Cain?

15. The CIA officials, the condemnation, no prosecutions? Their arguments about the document, the extensive redaction, the pseudonyms, revealing identities or not?

16. The United States, the appeal to integrity?

17. The film released at the time of the impeachment investigations of Donald Trump? Audiences understanding the intricacies of investigations, political stances, personal stances, secrecy in confidentiality, justice, documentation and examination, cover-ups?

THE TOBACCONIST

Austria/Germany, 2018, 117 minutes, Colour.
Simon Morze, Bruno Gans, Johannes Krisch, Emma Dragunova.
Directed by Nikolaus Leytner.

There have been many stories of Austria during the 1930s, life in the Austrian countryside, moves to the city of Vienna, the increasing anti-Semitism, the presence of the Nazis and their finally entering into Austria.

One of the differences with this film is that a central character is Sigmund Freud, played by the veteran German actor, Bruno Ganz, one of his last roles.

Simon Morza plays Frantz, a young man who has to leave his mother and their farm to go to work in the city, getting a job as an assistant to a tobacconist. The tobacconist, a veteran of World War I, with strong patriotic but leftist views, becomes the target of anti-Semitic prejudice. This opens up the reality of Vienna in the 1930s to the young man.

The film recreates the atmosphere of the city, especially the market, the clubs, with Frantz encountering a Slovakian refugee, becoming infatuated with her, tracking her down, finding out that she is a prostitute who also works in a cabaret.

Because Sigmund Freud is one of the customers of the tobacconist, and Frantz befriends him and vice versa, he asks Freud for his advice, and he advises him to write down his dreams, Freud offering him some leads to understand himself and his infatuation.

The film builds to a climax with attacks on the Jews, the arrest of the tobacconist and his death, Freud and his family moving to London.

1. A story of pre-World War II, Austria, the countryside, the cities, the persecution of the Jews? Sympathy for the Nazis? The takeover?

2. The country settings, the farm, life in the country? The transition to the city? The streets, the tobacconist shop, homes, clubs, workplaces? The musical score?

3. The story of Frantz? Life in the country, with his mother, an ordinary life, his having to move to the city, wary? The reference to Otto? Going to the shop, interactions with Otto, Otto’s political stances? The anti-Semitic atmosphere? Frantz observing it? Customers, passers-by, the demonstrations, prejudice? Frantz and the accommodation? Meeting people, the customers, the range of people, society? His finding a place in the city?

4. The character of Sigmund Freud, customer in the shop, living in Vienna, his family, his reputation and career? The cigars and his friendship with Otto, with Frantz? Frantz discussing his life with Freud, the background of psychoanalysis, Freud and his advice, putting his finger on the emotional situation? Telling Frantz to record his dreams? The impact of the dreams?

5. Frantz, at the market, enjoying the vitality, with people, the meeting with Anezka, her friendliness, sharing the beer? The mystery about her? His becoming infatuated, thinking about her, seeking her out, paying the man at the bar for her address? Finding her, her occupation, her background from Slovakia, surviving? Her leading him on? The exhilaration of the sexual encounter and playing naked in the rain? The encounters, the effect on him, talking to Freud?

6. The club, the performance, Anezka with the other men, her treatment of Frantz?

7. Otto, his character, running the shop, Frantz’s apprentice, learning the trade? The experience of world War I, losing his leg, patriotism, the arrest, the humiliation, his death? Otto and his political views? The customers in the shop? The leftist discussions, propaganda? The man on the building, throwing himself over – and the police miss reporting of the event?

8. Freud and his family, their wanting him to transfer to London, Frantz waiting outside, his being invited in, the discussions with Freud, Freud leaving?

9. The portrait of Frantz, a young man, transition from country to city, learning the ways of the city, his Infatuations, sexuality and emotions, the help of the psychiatrist? His future?

HOLIDAY IN THE WILD

US, 2019, 84 minutes, Colour.
Rob Lowe, Kristin Davis, Fezile Mpela, John Owen Lowe, Colin Moss.
Directed by Ernie Barbarash.

Holiday in the wild is much as it sounds. It is a blend of National Geographic photography of Zambian landscapes and animals with a romance for middle-aged adults.

Kristin Davis has actually worked with elephants and has supported the work in Africa including producing a documentary about the work. Here she plays a vet, her husband suddenly walking out on her, her son going to college, her going to Zambia for a second honeymoon and meeting Rob Lowe who is her guide but also works in the elephant centre.

She is exhilarated by the work and the life. There is an attraction but she is still handling the divorce; he is a widower. Her son also comes to visit but wants to drop out of college, she being upset but he making a plea about following his passion.

Quite a lot of scenes with elephants, an injured baby elephant and its recovery, big elephants – and a final plea at the end of the film highlighting the diminishing number of elephants in the world and asking for support.

1. The title and expectations? The African wild, Zambia? Animal reserves?

2. The New York settings, homes, photographs, ladies who lunch, offices? The vet’s workplace?

3. The contrast with Zambia, Lusaka, the luxury hotels, excursions, flights, the reality of the wild, vegetation, animals? The centre for the care of the elephants? The musical score?

4. Kate, the photos, Christmas cards, Drew and his being busy with his phone, the aftermath, his walking out? Kate shocked? Concern for Luke and his going to college?

5. The second honeymoon ordered, the flight, in the restaurant, the meal for two, the encounter with Derek, her being upset? The flight, meeting Derek again?

6. The work with the elephants, the foundation and support? Derek, Jonathan, their fathers, working in the reserves? The flight stop, the baby elephant, care for it, summoning the carriers, the centre, Kate and her background as a vet?

7. Staying, the tent, her work with the elephants, communication with Jonathan and his encouragement, with Derek, the attraction, her past experience, his being a widower? The time together, his advance, her resistance? The complication of the woman from South Africa – jealousy, and withdrawing the subsidy?

8. The Christmas atmosphere, celebrations, decorations, hymns and Christmas songs, African style? Jonathan, his wife, the cooking, the family? The happy atmosphere? The elephant, going out, finding the older elephant, bringing the baby back?

9. Kate communicating with Luke, the phone, his sudden arrival, his father paying the ticket? His sharing his mother’s work, enthusiasm? Discussions with her about dropping out of college, music?

10. Kate, staying, eventually returning? Her work in New York, the interview for being a vet? The divorce papers? Discussing with Drew about Luke and his passion and ambitions?

11. The happy return to Africa – romance and a happy ending?

PAIN AND GLORY/ DOLOR Y GLORIA

Spain, 2019, 113 minutes, Colour.
Antonio Banderas, Asier Etxeandia, Leonardo Sbaraglia, Nora Navas, Julieta Serrano, Cesar Vicente, Asier Flores, Penelope Cruz, Cecilia Roth.
Directed by Pedro Almodovar.

2019, celebrated Spanish director, Pedro Almodovar, turned 70. He has taken the opportunity to look back over his life and draw on different aspects for this narrative of an ageing director, his physical difficulties, the Pain of the title, and the memories of his successful career, the Glory of the title.

In fact, Almodovar came from an impoverished rural area of Spain, arriving in Madrid in the late 1960s, experimenting with friends and short films throughout the 70s, his first feature film in 1980 – which makes a career of almost 40 years of films, initially celebrated in Spain, then around the world, his being seen as the most significant of Spanish directors.

He has chosen his frequent collaborator, Antonio Banderas, to play his alter ego, the director, Salvador. And, with a pleasing touch, he has chosen another frequent collaborator, Penelope Cruz, to have the cameo role as the director’s mother.

At the opening of the film, Salvador’s voice-over explains how ill he is (the touch of the hypochondriac?), Even with elaborate animated visuals to illustrate in some detail what is wrong with him. With this explanation, he draws our attention and something of our sympathy. And, he has not been making films but is offered an opportunity to reflect on his past success, his glory. There has been a restoration of his 1980s breakthrough film, Sabor, and his being invited to participate in a Q&A after a screening. And, the star of the film, Alberto, is invited to join him. The difficulty is that he clashed with Alberto during the making of the film and has not been in contact for 32 years.

On the positive side, Salvador has looked at the film again, found it better than he first thought, has changed his opinion of Alberto’s performance. He makes contact, something of a reconciliation – although Alberto persuades him to try heroin. In addition to his many tablets and pills for his ailments and condition.

The rest of the narrative does not go quite in the direction that the audience might be thinking and is all the more arresting for that. There are a number of flashbacks to Salvador’s childhood, his relationship with his mother, his singing talent and being chosen for a school choir (with some clerical reminders of Almodovar’s Mal Educacion), his being a reader, the presence of a worker in the house who is taught to read and write by Salvador. There are also flashbacks to his conversations with his elderly mother and her preparation for death, for which he still grieves.

The Q&A does not quite go as expected. And Alberto has read a manuscript on Salvador’s computer and suggests that he perform it, Addiction, as a theatrical monologue. It is a great success – but leads Salvador even further back into the past, to a relationship with a friend, Federico, who had a drug addiction. Salvador’s love was not enough to break the addiction and, once again, a friend has receded into the long past.

We are shown a sequence where the worker, Eduardo, paints a picture of Salvador as a boy, sitting reading. Eduardo later washes himself, Salvador seeing him naked – and the memory stirring him to creative writing about himself, sexual desire, a new film, First Desire.

Of course, we can speculate about how much of Pain and Glory is part of Almodovar’s life and how much of it is creative fiction. Whatever our conclusions, this is a very distinctive, imaginatively created, finely performed, often Almodovar, real or imagined (or both).

1. The career of Pedro Almodovar? His international success? This screenplay drawing on his life, career, present and past?

2. The title, the emphasis on the painting, the opening with Salvador in the water, his explanation of his physical condition, the diagrams and extensive explanation, the different ailments, medication, interviews with doctors and treatment, scans? The effect?

3. The title, the past glory, remembering the past and celebrating it? Salvador in the present – reluctant to work? Only past glory?

4. The Madrid settings, the atmosphere, Salvador’s apartment, the streets, the buildings, the theatre? Hospitals, the doctor, the scans?

5. Memories of the past, the countryside, the women at the river and their washing, singing and dancing? The house? Having to move, the landscapes, the houses as caves, the decorating? The flashbacks to Jacinta, her living with her son? The musical score? The songs?

6. Antonio Banderas and his work with Almodovar? In the past, more recently? His winning the Best Actor award at Cannes? Other members of the cast, the presence of Penelope Cruz?

7. The narrative of his life and career, the 1980s, making the film Sabor, its success, his falling out with Alberto, the decision to restore the film, screenings, Q&A with Alberto? His chance meeting with the actress, learning Alberto’s address, making the contact, the visits, the past history, the tension, the passing of 32 years? The issue of cocaine and heroin? Alberto and heroin, inviting Salvador to use the heroin? The decision about the screening? Alberto’s visit, Salvador not wanting to go to the Q&A? The phone call, doing the Q&A by phone, Salvador and his denunciation of Alberto, the clash?

8. Alberto, in Salvador’s home, reading the text of Addiction? His making the proposal? The performance and the dramatic impact in the middle of the film? Federico present at the performance, his talking with Alberto, Federico phoning Salvador?

9. The narrative of Addiction? The early 1980s, Salvador and his love for Marcello, the gay love, the addiction by Marcello, Salvador trying to break the addiction? The break – no contact for 30 years? The memories? Federico affected, coming to the house, talking, Salvador remembering? Federico’s subsequent life, marriage and sons, divorce, the truth to his son’s, the possibility of staying the night, Salvador refusing? The promised to visit Argentina?

10. Almodovar and the screenplay, drawing on his past? The portrait of his mother, at the river, the washing, strong minded woman, at home, care for her son, her absent husband, going to the cave, her reaction, realising that Salvador liked it? The period in school, his singing well, the priest singling him out, his years of the choir but not having to attend classes in geography and other subjects, Salvador at home, his extensive reading? Eduardo and his girlfriend, asking for him to write their letter? Jacinta and her organising renovations in the house? Salvador reading, in the chair, Eduardo sketching his portrait, the boy’s collapse? Eduardo, his washing, Salvador seeing him naked? The finding of the picture later, the letter on the back, his mother receiving it but not sending it on? The possibility for finding Eduardo? Going to the Gallery, buying the picture? Its significance for him – First Desire?

11. The flashbacks to his elderly mother, the room, the rosaries, the mantilla, not wanting shoes at the funeral, to tread lightly in the next world? Talking to his mother, walking? Grief at her death, the continued effect?

12. Salvador, his age, his health, the touch of a hypochondriac, the range of medications, the taking of the heroin, the decision against it, after Federico’s visit? His experience of choking? The help of Maya, his housekeeper? The friendship with Mercedes, able to contact her at any time? Is Agreeing to go to the doctor with her, the scan, the calcifying, the surgery to remedy it?

13. His becoming creative again, stirred by the picture, the memories of Eduardo, making the film of First Desire?

LOVE ON THE SLOPES

US, 2018, 84 minutes, Colour.
Katrina Bowden, Thomas Beaudoin, Elysia Rotoru, Anthony Konechny, Corey Woods, Chris Shields.
Directed by Paul Ziller.

This is one of the many Hallmark movies made for television – and is considered one of the better romantic stories.

In a sense, this is a kind of film where the audience gets exactly what it wants. The central character is a journalist, is ambitious to write stories, enters a competition and goes to a ski resort where she hopes to find the whereabouts of a reclusive photographer. She is blonde and attractive – and he is tall, dark and handsome!!

Brief running time so she finds him almost immediately, hiring him as her sports coach as she overcomes her inner fears doing all kinds of extreme sports, bonding with him, his revealing something of his inner life to her.

She has a boyfriend who finally turns up and reveals her initial intentions. Audiences will be relieved that by and large everybody in the story is nice, the photographer giving permission to publish a story, the editor promoting her, and a happy ever after between the two.

1. Hallmark television movie? The target audience? Female? Male? The audience for a romantic stories?

2. The initial New York setting, Alex and her work, the editor, her friends in discussions, plan for the competition, the story, the Rockies resort, to find Cole?

3. The road and the breakdown, the town, the hotels, the mountains, the tracks, the waterfalls, bridges, skiing and snow…? The musical score?

4. Cole, his background, photography, his friend and manager? The chance encounter with Alex? Meeting are again, buying the sports clothes, helping, his becoming her official coach?

5. The days passing, the two together, the range of activities, the walk on the mountains, sliding the slopes, skiing, the prospect of bungeejumping…?

6. The bonds between the two? Talk about Barton? His eventual arrival, talking about her article, Cole hurt? His presuming the worst?

7. Alex, the article, her friend at the office, the editor seeing it, wanting to publish it?

8. Alex sending the article, the message of Cole, not to print unless he approved? His sending the message to the editor?

9. Promotion, love, happy ever after…?

YULI

Spain/UK/Cuba, 2018, 115 minutes, Colour.
Carlos Acosta, Santiago Alfonso, De La Luz, Yerlin Perez.
Directed by Iciar Bollain.

Carlos Acosta was one of the most celebrated dancers of the 20th century. Fortunately, much of his dancing, competitive dancing as well as theatrical performance, was filmed – and, again fortunately, much of it incorporated into the narrative of this portrait of Acosta.

This is certainly a dance film, many sequences of performance, a great deal of rehearsal and what that costs, excerpts of classical ballets, and a long sequence is inserted of a more contemporary dance which seems to echo something of Carlos Acosta’s life, especially his relationship with his father.

His Cuban father, descended from indigenous Cubans, strongly affirming the fact that he was a black Cuban, named his son Carlos with the traditional name of Yuli, a descendant of the gods. A strong minded man, he saw a dancing talent in his son and, a parent who dominated his voices, forcing him, often unwillingly, into a dancing career. Santiago Alfonso as Yuli’s father gives a strong performance, a powerful presence throughout the film. We see Yuli’s mother, a sympathetic woman, descended from the late-coming Spanish, as well as two sisters.

While there are sequences of the contemporary dance inserted throughout the narrative, this is still a fairly straightforward account of Yuli’s life.

Young Carlos is a cheeky boy, playing football with his friends, admiring Pele, preferring kicking a ball to training to be a dancer. He resists his father, who punishes him at times with a strap, reluctantly goes to some performances, is a recalcitrant truant, even sent away to boarding school. It is only the visit of a dancer who mesmerises Carlos during the performance that changes his mind.

The young actor makes an impression on us the audience, which enables other actors, Carlos as an adolescent, Carlos as young adult, to continue to make an impression.

Carlos is a superb dancer as the films from the past indicate, especially his winning an international competition, the family watching on television. He does achieve international success, especially in London. However, despite his father’s insistent exhortations, he is still devoted to Cuba, getting the opportunity to return home when he suffers an accident during rehearsal in London. And the question is, of course, will he return to dancing?

Even when he was little, he has the support of one of the teachers who enables him finally to go to boarding school, who trains him, helps him to enrolled in the international competition, continue to support him in his career, even when she runs a risk of being condemned by the isolationist regime.

The rest is Carlos’s history, the little Cuban boy, of black inheritance, Yuli, conquering the world – symbolised in the film by his performance in Romeo and Juliet, his father delighting that this is the first black Romeo in the British national company.

And, today? Carlos Acosta has acted in some films and is a strong presence in this film, a contemporary director and ballet teacher, devoted to Cuba and building up its dance heritage.

It is interesting to note that the film was written and directed by partners, Iciar Bollain and Paul Laverty (who had worked on the striking drama about Latin America, present and past, Even the Rain). There is a strong social comment running throughout the film, especially about the history of Cuba, its socialist experiment, the consequences for the Cubans, the post-Fidel change. Paul Laverty, in fact, has written the screenplays for all of Ken Loach’s film is since the mid-1990s.

1. A portrait of Carlos Acosta? His personal appearance in the film? Directing and dancing in the present? The actors taking his role as a boy, adolescent, young adult? The consistency of the performers, building up a credible portrait?

2. Carlos Acosta as Cuban? The Cuban settings, the vistas of Havana, the sea, the waterfront, significant buildings, the streets, poorer homes? The incomplete arts Centre? The schools, the rehearsals areas? The international settings? For rehearsals and performance? The London sequences, the city of London, the contrast with Havana, streets, flats, theatres?
3. The importance of the musical score, the background, the excerpts from the classical ballets? Contemporary dance?

4. The significance of Carlos and his background? Migrants to Cuba? Indigenous Cubans? Black Cubans? Slaves and their history? His father and his pride in this ancestry? The name of Yuli and the son of Ogun? The consciousness of this background throughout the film?

5. The framework of the film, Carlos Acosta and his success, the return to Cuba, teaching, setting up of the school? Seeing him and his direction of the contemporary dance (and much of it as a reflection on his own life and experience)? The screenplay returning to the sequences?

6. The director and the writer, Latin American sensibility, Scottish sensibility? Interpreting Carlos? And the significance of the social background of Cuba, of race, of poverty, of repression, of the drive to freedom?

7. Carlos as a little boy, playing with the kids, admiring Pele, not wanting to be a dancer? His father’s determination, the strong character of his father, even to violent behaviour? Is mother, his sisters, life at home? The reaction of the boys to his dancing, the language of fairies and fake it is, bullying?

8. The audition, his refusal, his father’s insistence, the teachers, admiring his talent, but his resistance, truancy, being called to account, his father’s demands? Punishment?

9. His going to the boarding school, going to the classes, yet his unwillingness? The visiting dancer, his being overwhelmed by the performance? His change of heart?

10. Growing up, his friends, life in Havana, dancing? The international competition, the use of the original footage, his success, happiness in the family? Yet the sad indications of Berta, walking along the water, schizophrenia, her ultimate drowning?

11. International opportunities? In Italy? Going to London? Carlos and his hesitations?

12. The importance of his teacher, from the beginning when he was a boy, her standing up for him, offering him last opportunities, training him, making demands? Success, pushing him internationally, the political risks at home?

13. England, the damp, yet his being at home, the rehearsals, the performances? His injury? Going back to Cuba, recovering, whiling away the time, his friends, confrontations with his father, talking about missing his childhood? His not wanting to dance? Yet underlying this?

14. The reaction of his father, mother, his sister? The teacher and the offer from Houston? His going back to dancing?

15. The symbolism of his dancing Romeo and Juliet, his father’s reaction to the first black Romeo in the English National Ballet?

16. The visit of his parents to London, the dinner, the discussions, the toast?

17. Carlos and his success? From dancing to teaching? Going back to Havana, the little boy and the dancing class – saying that he decided to dance because of Carlos?

SOUL BOY

UK, 2010, 80 minutes, Colour.
Martin Compston, Alfie Allen, Brian Mc Ardle, Felicity Jones, Nichola Burley, Pat Shortt.
Directed by Shimmy Marcus.

Over the years, British filmmakers like to go back into the past, especially into the history of trends in music. Steve Coogan appeared in Michael Winterbottom’s 24 hour Party People, taking the audience back into Manchester’s past. This film was more modest, going back to Stoke-on-Trent?, and the history of music and clubbers in the Wigan Casino.

The story is familiar enough, focusing on Martin Compston as the young man, few prospects at home, helping with a robbery, going about his work, interested in girls, learning to dance, selling records, participating in drug deals. He meets an attractive girl, an early role for Felicity Kendall. He is also attracted by another girl in the town played by Nichola Burley. After various conflicts, proving himself and dancing, he pursues Felicity Kendall – into some kind of future.


1. A film of the 1970s? The retrospect?

2. The title, the music of the early 70s, records and sales, bands and clubs, the Wigan Casino? Singing? Dancing? Competitions?

3. Stoke-on-Trent?, the introduction? Ordinary life? The young men of the town, jobs, prospects or not?

4. Russ’s story, his age, background, working with Brendan, the routines, the attempted robbery, the confrontation? His friends, Russ? Interesting music, records?, The attraction? His personal awkwardness? The discovery of the Wigan Casino? The visits, eye-opening? The music, his awkwardness in dancing, practising? The encounter with Mandy? Her teaching him? The haircut, the consequences? The young men and the girls? The issue of drugs? Pressures of dealers? The impact on Joe, Mandy and the drugs, his following her, the future?

5. Joe’s friends, Russ, his story, with the girls, with Joe, the drugs, the music? The other associates, at the music store and the records, the deals? The drug dealers? The stand over tactics of bounces?

6. The girls in the town, Jane, her work? Joe and his haircut? Mandy, the encounter, communicating with her, her hopes for artwork? At the casino, the drugs, the effect on her, her leaving, Joe pursuing her?

HAPPY SAD MAN

Australia, 2019, 100 minutes, Colour.
Directed by Genevieve Bailey.

In 2011, Genevieve Bailey released her first film as director, I Am 11. She had decided that 11 was an interesting age to explore, the transition from childhood to puberty, tracking a number of children throughout the world, boys and girls, in Australia and in different countries including Asia.

Since then she has been on the move, but very much around Australia. In this documentary, she explores the lives of five men whom she has known over the years. They are quite distinctive, each having his own story, sometimes very curious, which will interest the audience. However, they also have a common denominator. Each of them has some kind of mental illness experience. She herself appears as a character in the film, explaining her friendship with each of the men, sometimes appearing in the interviews, sharing their life experiences with them.

The first character we are introduced to is John. And he is quite a character, born in Broken Hill, moving around the country, settling in Melbourne, odd relationships with his children, a scrawny kind of character to look at and meet. In many ways he is the anchor of the film, the first one introduced, seen frequently throughout the film, and having the last word. Whether he would be too difficult to encounter in real life, one wonders, but certainly on screen he has many engaging moments, singing and playing a musical instrument, some dancing, a lot of travel, different meetings with his sons, concerns about his health. So, John sets the tone.

The second character, Jake (for Jacob) certainly arouses the interest. He worked as a cinematographer for Genevieve Bailey herself and had an ambition to be a film photographer. However, he made a decision to be a travelling photographer, going to war zones, especially in connection with the Syrian Civil War. There is a lot of graphic footage that he has collected, especially in the ruined city of Aleppo. He is of a Muslim background, relating very well to his earnest mother and his Australian grandmother who is very outspoken in her praise of her grandson, his causes, and critical of those not caught up in the same concern and enthusiasm. Jake also has a daughter in France with whom he has little contact. He has to make decisions about travelling the world or settling back in Australia.

And then we move on to Grant (and he says it is pronounced with a long a vowel sound because he comes from New Zealand). He is a genial man to meet, a surfer. However, after some time he is diagnosed as bipolar and not only lives with the consequences but ultimately, becomes a campaigner for awareness for mental health. This is especially true with gathering people on Bondi Beach, dressing up in carnival fashion, a celebration of joy for those with mental health difficulties. His campaigns continue.

And what to make of David? If we thought John was a touch eccentric, David is even more so. Tall, good-looking, bespectacled, putting on weight, living at home with his mother, a sense of humour which has more than its moments of weirdness. Probably best to describe in as a performance artist, with a huge long beam as an extended hand greeting people at Sydney’s Opera House, setting up some kinds of performance spaces, especially with his dog Teena and the plan to make a perfume which smells of dog!! He even appears on the Today Show, ready to enjoy his eccentricities – but the hosts receiving a lot of emails condemning them for setting him up and mocking him. David seems resigned – and happy to continue, despite his mental health issues, with his comic performances.

Which means that the last man to be introduced, Ivan, seems to be living a fairly calm and ordered life. A farmer, married twice and with sons, actually devotes himself to travelling around to farms and properties, to country towns, talking with men, a sympathetic listener, someone who is well aware of mental illness, the possibilities of suicide, but is able to be a calm presence, enabling people to speak their minds and their feelings, the most sympathetic character.

As with the title, Genevieve Bailey looks at both the happiness and sadness in their lives, men who are actually prepared to reveal something of themselves in the states and feelings, both happy and sad men.

DOSED

Canada, 2019, 82 minutes, Colour.
Adrianne.
Directed by Tyler Chandler.

Opioid addiction seems to be one of the great crises of North America and other countries.

This is a Canadian documentary exploring the use of psychedelic drugs in the battle against opioid addiction. It takes a strong stands for the use of mushrooms and their effect to combat addictive needs.

While there has been a great deal of discussion about the use of these drugs, and the fact that they are illegal, makes this a speculative drama. However, while it does discuss the nature of opioids and prescriptions, addiction effects for so many people, the availability of mushrooms and psychedelic drugs, it focuses on one particular person, Adrianne, telling her story, filmed by her friends Tyler Chandler and Nicholas Meyers (the cinematographer).

We are introduced to Adrianne in the middle of her treatment. She is asked what her greatest desire would be – and she answers: to wake sober. Then the film goes back several months, discussions with Adrianne herself, her explanation of her past life, comfortable bringing up, sympathetic mother, influences on her drug-taking, growing addiction to heroin and other drugs. She admits her mental illness, at times contemplating suicide, her frequent desperation.

She agrees to go into the program of taking mushrooms, beginning with a strong dose of 2 grams, allowing the cameras on her at all stages, the director interviewing her about her feelings and experiences, a cumulative effect of improvement over several months. There are some explanations about the psychedelic drugs and their euphoric effect, the highs of experiencing calm, love, a better appreciation of the self.

There are quite a lot of experts interviewed, doctors, researchers, personal care agents, with an explanation of how the psychedelic drugs work in the brain, diagrams to illustrate what is happening to various parts of the brain and the consequences.

As is clear, from the making of the film, Adrianne improves considerably over the months. Ultimately, the film moves to a period a year after the beginning of the experiment, Adrianne enthusiastically endorsing her experience, getting a job in the wildlife profession, but also volunteering to help people in situations similar to those she experienced.

As with other films, especially some documentaries on the use of medicinal marijuana, the American Breaking Habits, the Australian Green Lights, the film offers thought-provoking material, questions the availability of drugs which have been declared illegal, inviting discussion on their effectiveness.

WORKING WOMAN

Israel, 2018, 93 minutes, Colour.
Liron Ben- Shluch, Menashe Noy, Oshri Cohen.
Directed by Michal Aviad.

This is a strong film from Israel, a significant contribution to issues of sexual harassment.

While many of the headlines, especially in relationship to #MeToo, focus on the world of theatre and cinema, many more cases of sexual harassment of women occur in the workplace. This is the focus of Working Woman.

The focus here is on Orna, a mother of three, who has been successful during her military training, is involved with her husband in setting up a restaurant, wants to use her talents in work and property development, applying for a job with an entrepreneur, Benny, whom she had worked with in the army and who admires her ability. Despite some reluctance from her husband who is very much involved in the restaurant and finalising permits and other red tape, he agrees that the money she earns will benefit the development of the restaurant.

Property developers in Israel are thinking big, buying properties, developing high-rise luxury units, not only selling them in Israel itself but to Jewish customers overseas. They are not only luxury units but, for more traditional and older Jewish men and women, living in Europe and contemplating moving back to Israel, at least for a part of the year, there are synagogue and prayer opportunities, communal affirmation of couples who can buy units together in the building. Orna is particularly good in sales, personal empathy with clients.

With this scenario, the audience is well aware that there will be scenes of sexual harassment. We are just waiting to see when they will occur and in what circumstances. A business trip to Paris proves to be a catalyst and Benny, married long since, makes his aggressive approach. There is no doubt about Benny, his attitudes and behaviour.

The impact for the audience is how Orna reacts, the surprise, the violence, sense of helplessness, possibilities of some acquiescence, embarrassment and shame, aggression and hostility towards Benny. This is the key sequence, with consequences that the audience will ponder.

But, there is a further complication. How much will she say to her husband about the situation? How will he interpret it? Is he a loving husband? Is he a man who reacts to suspicions rather than to empathy with his wife? What about the children? What about the restaurant (and Benny has pulled some strings to get instant permits)? What about Orna and her continuing her work, the possibility that Benny will destroy her reputation?

Without revealing anything of the ending, most audiences will be pleased with how Orna thinks it through and how, shrewdly, she acts.

1. The title? A professional woman? In the business world? Success? Harassment and assault?

2. The Israeli setting, the city, home, restaurant, mansion, building sites and the sea, offices? The visit to Paris? The musical score?

3. The title and the perspective on women? In the workplace? Roles of men, roles of women? Equality? Inequality? Men exploiting women? Their taking it for granted? And the issue of the role of the husband, taking offence, jealousy, inability to accept the situation?

4. Orna’s story, her age and experience, wanting to work, the three children, financial situation, her husband establishing the restaurant, needing permits, the delays? Her application to work with Benny? The interview, accepted? Her role, in the office, with clients? Her skills in sales? The enterprise, the building, her giving it a name, Lily Beach, the contacts with the other members of the company, offices, interviews with officials? Her being accepted? The success?

5. The husband, setting up the restaurant, the bond between them, their children, his accepting her going to work, the issue of finance? Benny coming to his restaurant and complementing him? The invitation to the party, their going, conversations? The visit to Paris? His listening to Orna, the story, coaxing responses from her, his negative reaction, feeling betrayed, not talking to him, assuming the worst? His being presented in a bad light, not trusting his wife, the consequences?

6. Benny, the military, his knowing Orna before, often her the job, her skills, his appreciation, the kiss, her reaction? The work together, financial issues, promises of bonuses, promoting her, taking her to the building site, her reserve? Going to the restaurant for the meal? Going to the party, meeting the guests? The visit to Paris, her exhilaration in the city, her charm with the clients, the promise of the room for synagogue, sealing the deal?

7. Benny, the device with the key to the room, his pushing her into the room, forcing her against the wall, her resistance, stoic acceptance, his sexual behaviour, saying she drove him wild, his complete oblivion to the impact on her?


8. The return home, her upset, with her children, her daughter comforting her? The phone calls, deciding to get a new job, using the device of regular hours, asking Benny for the recommendation? His refusing? Her composing the letter herself, taking it to his house, confronting him in front of his wife, his reluctance signing the letter? The wife
observing?

9. The portrait of the family, Orna and her relationship with the children, sharing the work with her husband?

10. The final sequence, or the walking along the street, her self-assertion, self-respect, confronting her assailant, her future?