AMAZING GRACE


US, 1971/2019, 88 minutes, Colour.
Aretha Franklin, James Cleveland, Alexander Hamilton, C.L,Franklin, Clara Ward.
Directed by Allan Elliot, Sydney Pollack.


John Newton, the 18th century composer of the celebrated hymn might have had an amazing and graced experience if he saw and heard Aretha Franklin’s version in this film record.

The documentary was unexpected. It is a record of two nights of recording the Amazing Grace album with Aretha Franklin, not in a studio, but in a church accompanied by musician and singer, her longtime friend, Rev James Cleveland. The recording was made in 1971. Warner Brothers was interested at the time and sent director, Sidney Pollack, was emerging after some years of filmmaking, including They Shoot Horses, Don’t They, as a leading Hollywood presence – as he continued over several decades. He can be seen in several scenes discussing with technicians and taking close-ups of Aretha Franklin.

However, the report was that the clapper board was not used to identify all the sequences and takes, and that there were five cameras in the church for the event. Which meant then that it was too difficult, technically, to match the voice recording with the visuals and the project was abandoned – and some comment that Aretha Franklin was not happy with the process.

But, there have been extraordinary developments in technology, and Aretha Franklin is named as one of the producers of this film, a painstaking editing, sound and image synchronising, and, after almost 50 years, an opportunity for audiences to share in the experience of the event and, of course, of Aretha Franklin’s voice.

One of the aspects that audiences will notice about this film is how much hard work goes into performance, performance under lights and cameras, sweat glistening frequently from both Aretha Franklin and James Cleveland, at one stage, her father getting active and wiping his daughter’s face. (He is actually present for the second night of recording, obviously proud of his daughter, reminiscing about her singing when she was six or seven, going on tour with him preaching, his Baptist ministry which was based in Detroit, and her further career – both secular and, as with this album, a collection of songs and hymns she sang during her childhood.)

She wanted to do the album with a live audience and with that extraordinary and active participation that the congregations, especially African-American? congregations, bring to their services and expressing their faith. Featured here is a Southern Californian Choir, under the extraordinarily active and enthusiastic direction of Alexander Hamilton, and many shots of them and the broad congregation singing, calling out, affirming, standing and waving, some young people enthusiastically dancing. (And, there are some glimpses of Mick Jagger in the congregation sharing some of that enthusiasm and action.)

This is not a smooth production. There are explanations that when mistakes are made there will be new beginnings of songs, people having to remember the words that were sung or shouted when filming was interrupted! So, there is a great deal of material which could be described as “behind-the-scenes� but which become integral to the scenes.

Of course, the key to the whole film and the restoration is to see and hear Aretha Franklin and the great range of songs and hymns that she performs. We are amazed at her versatility, her range, here timing, her vocal virtuosity, her commitment to the songs and their faith and religious dimensions.

ME & MY LEFT BRAIN

Australia, 2019, 76 minutes, Colour. Alex Lykos, Malcolm Kennard, Rachel Beck, Chantelle Barry, Natalia Ladyko..
Directed by Alex Lykos.

it is something of a surprise to find a reference to the left brain, even incorporating it into the title. And, then, there is a discovery that one of the main characters is actually called Left Brain!

This is a brief comedy written and directed by Alex -like loss, who made the entertaining interfaith Sydney comedy drama, Greek orthodox and Lebanese Christian, and ethnic and religious variation on Romeo and Juliet, Alex and Eve.

Lykos himself plays the central character, Arthur. Arthur has a touch of the morose. He has more than a touch of the nerd. He lives a lonely kind of life, somewhat remote. But he does have ambitions to be an actor. And he does have an ambition to fall in love.

We see him walking down the street with an older man, their conversations, the older man being rather bossy on his way, telling Arthur what to do, exasperated when he doesn’t do it, when Arthur becomes timid and backs out of situations.

And just who is this older man, played by Mel Kennard? Of course, he is Arthur’s ultimate ego, or at least his left brain alter ego, Mr Left Brain.

One good thing in Arthur’s favour is that he has a best friend, Vivian, much more outgoing, tangled in her relationships (with a comic situation where Arthur intrudes on her episode with a big, bearded, burly Irishman). And, sometimes, Vivian herself has her shadow Left Brain.

At the centre of all of Arthur’s anguish and the urging of Left Brain is the girl of Arthur’s dreams, Helen (Chantelle Barry) – the focus of many flashbacks, happy Times, companionship, Arthur being taken seriously. But, what can Arthur do, phone, text, try to meet up with Helen? No wonder Left Brain is exasperated.

The film uses the amusing device of Arthur going to bed after failing to contact Helen, Left Brain lying on the bed trying to doze – and continual focus on the digital clock, registering the passing of time (exceedingly slowly) Arthur momentarily dreaming, momentarily yearning, the clock moving on half a minute or so!

Vivian tells her Left Brain that Arthur is her best friend – and, she is always prepared to come to his rescue!

A mini comic slice of life.

I AM MOTHER

Australia/US, 2019, minutes, Colour.
Clara Rugaard, Hilary Swank, Luke Haker, Voice of Rose Byrne.
Directed by Grant Sputore.

Once more we are in a post-apocalyptic world. All that is left seems to be devastation, and an atmosphere that is poisonous. But, especially, the humans have disappeared and control is in the hands of robots. It is artificial intelligence which rules the small and isolated worlds.

This is an Australian production, in collaboration with the United States. It makes an impact as an international production.

The initial focus is on a robot, created effectively by Wetta effects, quite detailed in its complex construction and movements (and inhabited by an actor/technician).

But all is not lost for the humans. The robot is in a laboratory, controlling a human baby, caring for it, training it, in fact, doing the work of the mother. And, as the child grows, she is called Daughter, the robot is Mother.

Mother continues to be protective, careful to develop the young girl as she grows, educating her very effectively (even appreciating language and human behaviour by watching old television shows. As she grows, Daughter is played by Clara Rugaard. The voice of mother is provided by Rose Byrne.

Some, one might ask, what is the future for the human race? Are there many other Mothers? Anymore Daughters or Sons? Will the time come when they will meet, achieve the growth and intelligence expected by the robots? Will there eventually be human communities?

As might be expected, there will be something sinister to disturb the relationship between Mother and Daughter. There is another creature, played by Hilary Swank, who disturbs the relationship, creates doubts, threatens what is peace in highly technical equivalent of a Garden of Eden, where Daughter can act as mother for a human baby.

One for those who enjoy post-apocalyptic stories, stories of artificial intelligence, stories of the roles of humans in this kind of future.

1. A post-apocalyptic story? The effect on earth? The human race? The developments of robotics?

2. The future, survival, robotics and artificial intelligence, control? The restoration of humans – slow process?

3. The laboratory, the machines, the look of the robots, their structure, action, engineering? Mother’s voice? Mother in action? The musical score, the use of the song, Baby of Mine from Dumbo?

4. Daughter, produced in the laboratory, the role of Mother, human? Mother and care? The development of the child? Mother and her learning mothering?

5. Daughter growing, the developing trust, process of learning, relationships? Yet isolated in the laboratory? Her life and lifestyle, education, past television shows? The effect? Age, the growing curiosity?

6. Mother, seemingly ingenuous, cautioning Daughter? Not to get contaminated? Means of prevention, control? His Daughter wanting to explore?

7. Daughter hearing sounds, the search, deceiving Mother, the discovering of the other woman, taking risks?

8. The rescue, the personality of the woman? The effect on daughter? Mother’s threats? Another human, the weapon, her possessiveness about it?

9. Mother, the reaction, helping in the rescue, taking the rifle? The woman’s injuries, care?

10. The bond between daughter and the woman, Daughter being wary, building up to conflict?

11. Daughter’s dilemma, association with the woman, of the human? Mother and warnings, prevention? The irony of Mother having to admit that there were other humans?

12. Mother offering Daughter and option, to be a mother herself, to abandon the strange woman?

13. The birth of the other child, Daughter and her becoming mother? The future – and possibilities of union between other humans? Or Daughter keeping her child in isolation?

CLAIRE DARLING/ LA FOLIE DE CLAIRE DARLING

France, 2019, 90 minutes, Colour.
Catherine Deneueve, Chiara Mastroianni, Alice Taglione, Laure Calamy, Amid Guesmi, Oliver Rabourdin, Johan Leysen.
Directed by Julie Bertucelli.

This is the kind of film that you would expect from France, something of a domestic story, some human and some tragedy, with Catherine Deneuve in the lead. (And, something of a tribute to her, that she has been headlining films in France, but also internationally, for 55 years.)

Actually, the direct English title is misleading, especially with the evocative charm of the word “darling�. This title is merely partial. The French title adds “La Folie de�, which we might translate as “mad whim� or, at least, “foolish whim�.

And the whim opens the film, Claire waking up in the morning, deciding that this is the last day of her life, that she needs to set up a garage sale and get rid of everything in her house – and it is one of those fine houses, full of paintings, art objects, valuable pieces as well is knickknacks.

Obviously, Catherine Deneuve is at home in this kind of role. Claire is in her late 70s and is beginning to show signs of dementia. Out everything goes, her co-opting workers from the local quarry which her husband used to own, crowds gathering on and her getting rid of everything at extremely cheap prices.

But, we wonder, what has led to this. It means then the film incorporates quite a number of flashbacks, Alice Taglioni stepping in for the younger Claire. These flashbacks at first introduce her two children, Martin and Marie. It is also suggested that there has been a long estrangement from her daughter – who then turns up, concerned about her mother, linking again with her, and Marie herself going into flashbacks of the past. Interestingly, Marie is played by Catherine Deneuve’s actual daughter, Chiara Mastroianni.

As the day goes on, mother and daughter talk to each other, with flashbacks to their father at a crucial sequence where he physically collapses and Claire begins to phone for an ambulance, she remembering the story one way, her daughter remembering another.

Other characters include a friend of Marie from the past who is upset at the garage sale, wanting some kind of control for Claire. There is also the best friend of Claire’s son, Marie reassuring him that she did not blame him for the accident in the quarry for her brother.

While much of the screenplay suggest that this is ‘c’est la vie’, the ending is not quite what we expect but does include Claire visited by a priest friend and her asking him to perform and exorcism on her house – but, after Claire’s wandering on the street, collapsing, being taken to hospital, meandering out of hospital, it is simply boiling a kettle for a cup of tea while local fireworks light up the sky, that brings the story to its close.

Come to think of it,, tres, tres francaise.

1. The title? The extra nuance of the French title and the mad whim? Typical of French dramas? Family? Stories of the past, guilt and regrets? Age and prospect of death?

2. The French country town, the mansion, exteriors, the interiors, the range of decorations and ornaments? The garage sale? The town, the streets, the quarry? The flight, the fireworks? The burning house? The musical score?

3. Catherine Deneuve and her place in French cinema? For 55 years? The screen presence? Working with her daughter Chiara Mastroiannni?

4. The portrait of Claire, age, beauty? Waking up, the day of her death? The whim of the title? The garage sale, the advertisements, getting the young men from the quarry to carry everything, the range of customers, the cheap prices, eventually their being sent away? The touch of dementia? The prospect of dining? As a person, her memories, the flashbacks with her family, her son and imagining him at the piano, her daughter and the clock in the bedroom, her husband, the news of the death of their son, her anger and being upset? Her husband’s collapse, her picking up the phone, her not calling the ambulance? Asking her daughter later – and her being reassured that she did call the ambulance? The erratic behaviour throughout the day, becoming tired, the meeting with Martine? Memories of the past, the souvenirs, Martine wanting to call off the sale?

5. Marie, her arrival, estrangement from her mother, memories of the past? Her concern? Memories of her father, of her brother, his death, her father’s collapse and the phone call? Memories of Ahmid? His surviving when her brother died? The bond between them? Going to the quarry? Her relationship with her mother, the sale, calming her down? Her mother in hospital, leaving?

6. Claire and her sense of failure as a mother, the sense of guilt, the death of her husband, the relationship with Pere George, his visit, concern, reassuring her, her wanting him to perform an exorcism, his bringing the vestments, performing the actual ceremony? Claire, confused, lying down, going out on the road, the approaching car, her collapse, hospital, leaving?

7. Some sense of peace with her past, reconciliation with Marie? Memories of Martin? Putting on the kettle, the gas not igniting? The spark, the house and the conflagration?

8. A reflection on age, the meaning of life, guilt, grace, reconciliation and atonement?

UNDER THE SILVER LAKE

US, 2018, 139 minutes, Colour.
Andrew Garfield, Riley Keogh, Topher Grace, Luke Baines, David Yow, Jeremy Bobb.
Directed by David Robert Mitchell.

Perhaps there should be consumer advice giving information which states, “weirdness�, a caution that most moviegoers, who are not on the wavelength of weirdness and do not want to be, could be warned off. This is one of those films. However, for audiences who like movies which are “different�, to say the least, movies which have complex plots and quite unanticipated dramatic turns, from directors who enjoy playing with performances and camera techniques, this is definitely to put high on the list. And, it does not shortchange its audience - it runs for two hours and 20 minutes.

The Silver Lake is, in fact, in East Los Angeles. It is generally not a dark and shadow in place although the film does take us underground, into a bunker area, through tunnels, to the Hollywood Hills and interiors. But, most of the day scenes are in bright sunshine.

This is the story of a Californian slacker, Sam,, with Andrew Garfield in every sequence. No explanation of where he gets his money (but his car towed away and landlords getting police to warn him about eviction unless he pays his rent). And, when asked about his work, he says he doesn’t do any – and certainly the evidence is there all the way through.

He is certainly an ogler, spying on his neighbours, even with binoculars, almost gaping at any woman he comes across – and many of them give him every opportunity to gape. On the one hand is rather inarticulate, frequently in a four-letter way. On the other hand, a lot of the dialogue is what we might call California-existential, probing the meaning of life, speculations (often rather weird) death, afterlife (which is rather hedonistic).

He stirs himself when an attractive young woman in a downstairs apartment mysteriously disappears. He sets himself a quest, to find her, to rescue her. (The screenplay is full of codes: anything in the fact that the woman is played by Riley Keogh, granddaughter of Elvis and Priscilla Presley, daughter of Lisa Marie Presley – who, amongst her four husbands, we find Nicolas Cage and Michael Jackson!)

Where there is some more weirdness is that Sam is fascinated by codes, symbolic numbers, mysterious signs and emblems. A lot of discussion about code breaking and special meanings to be discovered everywhere, in entertainment, in music, with special reference to those theories about music played backwards, discovery of satanic messages. In fact, there is a character whose life is absorbed by all of this, his apartment walls covered in signs and diagrams, both mundane and alarming, a hidden tunnel with all kinds of esoterica, and a high belief in conspiracy theories. And as the plot progresses, with a mysterious songwriter who claims to have infiltrated many songs with hidden messages, with a self-proclaimed king of the homeless, with a group of neo-hippies eager to move on to the next state of existence, there is plenty, more than plenty, to tantalise the weirdness audience.

So, a stylish -looking film at times, yet the mundane world of East Los Angeles, a character who we are interested in but may find it difficult to like, a great number of strange Californian types, all adding up to…? But, of course, that is one of the main aims of the film, for us to make of it what we will, especially considering the conspiracies, the messages and the codes.

CHILD'S PLAY

US, 2019, 90 minutes, Colour.
Aubrey Plaza, Mark Hamill, Gabriel Bateman, Brian Tyree Henry, Tim Matheson, David Lewis.
Directed by Lars Klevberg.

In June 2019, three films concerning dolls and toys were released at the same time. However, two of the films had malevolent toys while the third had a whole range of lovable toys. The two horror films were Child’s Play and Annabelle Comes Home, quite a contrast to Toy Story 4.

Annabelle was the third in a series focusing on the destructive Annabelle. Child’s play is a remake of a film of 1989 which had a couple of sequels. The malevolent dolls name was Chucky, causing slashing mayhem in the late 80s, and now reprising mayhem with 21st-century updates – and using the voice of Mark Hamill, a far cry from Luke Skywalker!

The film starts moderately but moves into some ugly deaths and a slashing finale. However, it seems quite genial at first, opening with a very glossy commercial by the head of the company which produces doll-robots, just the right companion for children, a friend for life, called Buddi. But, after sunshine and smiles come grim clouds, the factory in Vietnam where the dolls are made, a supervisor who needs plenty of lessons in human resources skills and fires one of the workers. And, what is a worker to do but sabotage the doll, removing all its protective mechanisms. (Is the filmmaker implying that this is some kind of revenge from Vietnam on the US?).

Aubrey Plaza is Karen, a single mother, bringing up her young son, deaf, Andy (a very engaging and professional performance by Gabriel Bateman). Karen works at the market where the Buddi dolls are sold (and return by disgruntled customers which, of course, leads to her bringing one of the returned toys home for Andy).

Guess which one!

The doll is called Chucky, befriends Andy, mimics words, digitalises images and can reproduce them at will. While there are some friendly memories, Chucky acquires quite a lot of animosity, Andy’s resentment about his vanished father, his wishing that his mother’s boyfriend would disappear, and is not too happy with his cat which cuts into his arm. All for Chucky’s future reference.

There is something of a disturbing sequence when Andy and two of his friends spend time watching horror films on TV, Chainsaw Massacre and Leatherface ugly stuff but, instead of being horrified, they roar with laughter. However, the writers insert this because very soon there is going to be a particular Leatherface episode and, more gruesomely, a circular saw killing.

Andy spends a lot of time trying to get rid of the Leatherface that has appeared in his room, is friendly with a detective and his mother along the corridor of the apartment block, as well as with some of the local friends, building up a lot of tension and, finally, the Z Market with crowds arriving for the countdown for the new edition of the Buddi dolls. Where better to have Chucky take Karen as a hostage, see many of the new dolls turning malevolent, murder and mayhem, the burden of saving his mother falling on Andy.

But, that was what the fans of the Child’s Play movies were expecting!

1. The popularity of the original film in series? 21st-century remake and update?

2. The horror elements of the film? The malevolent all? Violence and killings?/A movie?

3. The fantasy element of the plot? Implausible but intriguing?

4. The commercial, the boss, his explanation of the doll, the best friend, accompanying a child, the children in the commercial? His later reappearance, promoting Buddi 2? His eventually taking responsibility for the disaster – but promising more?

5. The Vietnam opening, the making of the dolls, the dreamer workman, the insults of his supervisor and his being sacked, his malevolent response, taking the barriers from the doll? It is being exported to the United States? And some overtones of Vietnam wreaking some vengeance on the US?

6. Karen, single mother, the father abandoning his wife and son? Her work in the store? The people wanting to return their toys and her reaction? The new toy and the anticipation, the return toy, discussions with the manager about having the toy, emotional blackmail? Her taking it home, the gift for her son, his being alone, not making friends, his deafness?

7. Andi, his age, his father leaving, is expecting everyone to leave? A loner, self-conscious, love for his mother, his finding her with Shane, his resentment of Shane? Out in the corridor, the encounter with the detective and his mother?

8. Karen and Andy, the relationship, Shane is unpleasant, exploiting Karen, resentful towards Andy? Andy and his reactions? The discovery of the chain had his own family?

9. Karen bringing home the doll, the audience knowing it was malevolent, the advertised talents of its being able to speak, respond, help around the house, the best of friends for a child? Setting up the doll? Calling him Chucky?

10. Chucky, his look, Mark Hamill voicing him? His abilities? Mimicry, recording words and actions? Wanting to be Andy’s friend? The buildup to the list of enemies: the hostility of the cat and scratching Andy, Shane and Andy wanting him gone, the detectors mother and Andy being her best friend…?

11. Getting rid of Shane, his going home, bringing down the lights, the latter, his falling, destroying his feet, trying to reach a phone? And the face set up in Andy’s room?
.
13. Andi and is making friends with the locals, Pug and Jane, the group of boys, the fascination with Chucky? The watching horror films, Leatherface, chainsaw massacre is…, The intensity of their laughing? The point being made about films and their effect on children?

14. Karen, being upset, putting Chucky in the cupboard, his getting out? The special pleading with Andi?

15. Andi, his friends, putting the Leatherface down the chute? The death of the cat?

16. The caretaker, his leering at Karen, his discovering Chucky, trying to fix him, success, Chucky turning on him, tying him to the pipe, the increase in temperature, the circular saw and his death?

17. The detective, his mother, Andy and the gift, delaying the opening, getting the head putting it down the chute? Chucky watching the meal, the mother saying Andy was her best friend? The app, able to order the car, driverless, going to the bingo, the car and the wheelies, the crash, the mothers death, Chucky’s revenge about the best friend?

18. The buildup to the climax, the crowds lining up for the countdown for the new toy, the owner and the screen with the commercial, the range of new toys – many with the touch of the malevolent, the beers? Karen captured and tied up? The detective and his saving the lives as the toys went berserk? The buildup to the kids, getting control, Andy staying behind to confront Chucky, his destruction?

19. The popularity of this kind of slasher film?

YESTERDAY

UK, 2017, 116 minutes, Colour.
Himesh Patel, Lily James, Ed Sheeran, Meera Syal, Sanjeev Bhaskar, Joel Fry.
Directed by Danny Boyle.

A pleasant what-if… fantasy. Or, perhaps, a wonderful impossible dream about fame and fortune. But, with a moral: what if Jack gains the whole Beatles’ repertoire and suffers the loss of himself.

Yesterday has strong credentials. Writer Richard Curtis brought us Blackadder and Mr Bean as well as films like Love, Actually. And Danny Boyle won his Oscar for directing Slumdog Millionaire. They make a combination who knows how to entertain an audience.

We are introduced to Jack, stocking shelves in a supermarket, something of a dreamer, irritating the manager and likely to be fired – except that he relates very well to the customers. Just as well since he is a local singer and is managed by his girlfriend, Ellie, (though seemingly oblivious of her love for him). He is played by Hemish Patel, making a breakthrough on the big screen but having a record number of appearances on the British television series, Eastenders. And Ellie, his manager, his played by the ever-vivacious Lily James. (And, for those who appreciate British television, his parents are played by Meera Syal and Sanjeev Bhaskar who featured as The Kumars at Number 42.)

The what if… occurs in one of those life-changing car crash accidents, Jack losing his front teeth and waking up in a world which has no recognition of the Beatles Yesterday, no knowledge or memories of the Beatles themselves.

Singer Ed Sheeran is also in the cast as himself, someone who recognises Jack’s abilities, invites him to play in support of one of his performances. Success overnight, moving towards fame, including a literal move to Los Angeles and the approach of one of those dragon-agents, Kate MacKinnon? relying on his strong-armed, textile, who tries to take control of his life and career.

As Jack sings more of the Beatles songs, tries to recollect the lyrics, audiences are delighted by hearing the Beatles songs. Should Jack confess? The Americans want him to collect his songs for an album, amazed at his ability to write songs that quickly and by himself – and, he and his friend Rocky (Joel Fry), a slacker who now acts as his manager, go back to who visit Strawberry Fields and Abbey Road to the puzzlement of the Americans. And, there is some tension in the background with Ellie seeming to give up on her love for Jack and his recognising it.

John Lennon fans will enjoy imagining him in old age.

And so, Jack’s moral dilemma, whether to let the world know or not. What would we do!

Obviously, Yesterday is not going to have an unhappy ending so, we are able to sit through Jack’s ups and downs, be entertained, and like the elderly couple who go to see Jack, who do remember and are delighted that he is keeping alive the Beatles music, Beatles fans will relish this story – a tribute to the Beatles which, one hopes, will attract a younger generation and certainly keep their music alive.

1. The title? Memories of the song? The significance of the Beatles? The tone for the story?

2. The film as a tribute to the Beatles, the skills of John Lennon and Paul Mc Cartney, melodies and lyrics?

3. The audience enjoying the incorporation of so many of the Beatles songs?

4. A comic fantasy, John, the experience of the crash, hospital, losing his front teeth in the comic look, discovering the world in which there was no knowledge of the Beatles, cigarettes or Coca Cola!

5. John, as the centre of the film, sympathetic, his age, teaching, the job is in the supermarket, his relating to customers? His singing, Ellie as his manager, the clubs? The bond with her, but not seeing her with love? The friends, the group? The fans, his performances?

6. His family, the Indian background, living in the suburbs, the bonds? The mother supporting him? The father and his bum his matter, not really listening to his son, the visitor and the phone calls and interruption, preoccupation with food – and later the tuna sandwiches or for himself? John and is trying to sing let it be?

7. The competition, the small audience, the big successful groups, meeting Rocky, his idiosyncratic character, his being fired, Jack taking him on as manager? Ellie resigning?

8. The group, Jack singing Yesterday, there are maize reaction? Not knowing the Beatles? His Google search, finding John Paul II!

9. His being affirmed, meeting and Sheeran, and Sheeran is a character, his own career, the bond with Jack, introducing his performance, going to Los Angeles? Rocky going as well?

10. The American agent, her heart personality, hearing him, interested in money, getting into LA, the interviews, the plans? Rocky as part of the entourage?

11. The range of songs, the Beatles memories, is trying to remember the lyrics, playing the melodies, the plan for the double album, there’s members of the agencies, rehearsals, performance, recording?

12. Jack’s decision not to tell the truth about the Beatles songs? Going to England, visiting Strawberry fields, Abbey Road? The old couple having seen him perform, watching, getting together to listen to him, they’re remembering the Beatles songs, glad that he was bringing them to life? The contrast with the Americans, and even and Sheeran approving A cab dude?

13. The discovery of John Lennon, going to visit him, John Lennon and nearly 80, having a quiet life – and making the audience through credit his untimely death once again?

14. The preparation for the performance, the crowds, Rocky going to the wrong door! Jack and his fears, the recording, Ellie and her friendship with Gavin, Jack upset, courting people out of the recording room, temperament?

15. Ellie, the continued support, love?

16. The crowds loving Jack, responding to him, to the Beatles songs? Ed, his concert, Jack interrupting, singing?

17. Jack telling the truth, the response of the audience? The agent and her walking out in disgust?

18. And, of course, a very happy ending? And handing on the music to the children?

IN YOUR HANDS/ AU BOUT DES DOIGTS

France, 2018, 104 minutes, Colour.
Lambert Wilson, Kristin Scott Thomas, Jules Benchetrit, Karidja Toure, Elsa Lepoivre.
Directed by Ludovic Bernard.


A film about a very talented pianist, In Your Hands seems a reasonable title. However, as with many English versions of French titles, it seems to underestimate the nuances of the French. The nuance is an emphasis on fingertips rather than, simply, hands.

Being absorbed in music, that a pianist’s life is music alive in them, is the theme of the film. This is quite an emotional story and, one notes that several bloggers have dismissed the film as far too sentimental. Which is a reminder of the wise dictum of W. Somerset Maugham, that sentimentality is merely sentiment that one disapproves of! Most audiences will be caught up in the feelings, and the emotions. And the audience emotions are not simply nice feelings.

In fact, Mathieu (Jules Benchetrit), the young man whose story we are drawn into is not the most pleasant of characters, not easy to get on with. He has chips on his shoulder, to say the least, has grown up poor, his mother out cleaning to support three children, his getting mixed up with local gangs in Paris, involved in home invasions, arrested by the police, and seemingly, he couldn’t care less. Any hope for his future except more of the same?

However, we first see him at a busy railway station concourse playing the piano that has been made available for the public. He is intense, playing complex Bach orchestrations. We find one man, standing, looking, admiring. As it turns out, the man, Pierre, is the director of students at the Conservatoire de Paris. He is played by Lambert Wilson (who many will remember, with admiration, as the abbot in Of Gods and Men). He gives Mathieu his card who treats it with some disdain but, after his arrest, phones Pierre.

In many ways, this is a story of rehabilitation. Pierre arranges a deal, that Mathieu does community service cleaning the Conservatoire while attending music and theory lessons. Lessons are not in Mathieu’s life ambitions. He resists, is insulting, but forced to play his part in the deal. The best piano tutor, the English Miss Buckingham (Kristin Scott Thomas) sees his talent but tries to instil some discipline.

We know how the film is going to end, especially when Mathieu is entered into an international competition, but it is the steps which lead from resentment and lack of cooperation to ultimate success which the audience wants to follow. One of the steps is his attraction to a violinist who is studying the cello, Anna (Karinida Toure). It is the first time he has felt genuine affection for anyone except for the family his family to whom he is very close.

But, it is not mellowing in an instant, and there are further complications as the management of the institution train up another student just in case Mathieu opts out. There is also a complication which we learn rather late, Pierre and his wife (who have offered their visitors’ apartment for him to stay) having lost their son to leukaemia and the wife thinking that Mathieu is a substitute son whereas Pierre lives for music.

For music lovers, there are some performances of Bach, Liszt’s Hungarian Rhapsody, and rehearsals performance of Rachmaninoff.

We are in admiration of the young actor, Jules Benchtretit, not so much for his performance (not too difficult to act as surly) but the deftness of his skills in performing hand and finger movements for the playing.

A film of humanity, recognition of giftedness, affirming difficult people, encouraging talent, forming bonds of affection and genuine love.

1. The title? The focus on a pianist and his hands? Fingers on fingertips?

2. A film about the love of music, music and life, life in music?

3. Paris, the neighbour left, working class? Jobs? Youngsters and gangs? Police in home invasions? Homes?

4. The contrast with Paris in the world of the Conservatory, the vast interiors, concert areas, performance, also offices? Paris in the streets, the world of restaurants, style?

5. The importance of the musical score, the range of popular songs like That Last? The classics, performance, bark, Liszt, Rachmaninov? The orchestrations?

6. Mathieu, in himself, age, his friends, family and bonds with them? His growing up, his anger is, the gang and the home invasions? Playing the piano in the railway station? The police pursuit? Cheeky? Yet his sensitivity, performance, prospects?

7. The flashbacks, Mathieu and his memories of Jacques, the invitation to the piano, his teaching year, performance? The teaching, the encouragement, the emphasis on feelings?

8. Pierre, at the station, listening and watching, talking with Mathieu, giving his card? Mathieu calling him and his going to the police station? Community service, the deal and the arrangements, cleaning, the music lessons?

9. Mathieu, his reaction, mopping the floors, the discussions with Pierre, his angers, going to Miss Buckingham, the Liszt performance? His moods and different reactions?

10. The effect of the encounter with Anna, friendship, the invitation to the party, the bouncer not letting him in? Texting? Meeting, the meal? His gradually changing attitudes because of his response to her?

11. Pierre, his work, the discussions with the Board, preparing a rival candidate for the competition, Pierre laying his job on the line, his decisions? His relationship with his wife, tensions at home? The later revelation about their son dying of leukaemia? His decision to make the apartment available to mature?

12. Miss Buckingham, British, her past successes a pianist, as a teacher and mental? Demands? Matthew’s reaction to her?

13. His gradually changing, letting deeper emotions come, the competition, international, the choice of Rachmaninov? The variety of scenes of rehearsals?

14. At home, meeting his friends, the feeling he neglected them, going to classes, practice, the tendonitis?

15. David, the accident, go to hospital?

16. Mathieu, wanting to give up, meeting Pierre’s wife and her story about the substitute son? The friends and their looking down on him? Saying that his mother was not interested?

17. The hospital, his mother supporting him, going back on his decision, motivated by his brother, running and hurrying to the performance?

18. Late, the substitute standing down, his performance, the applause?

19. The themes of life and music, in motion? Miss Buckingham, the video of her performance? Pierre anxious, supporting a tutor?

20. Six months later, Pierre and Miss Buckingham in New York, Mathieu and his performance?

THE KITCHEN

US, 2019, 102 minutes, Colour.
Melissa Mc Carthy, Tiffany Haddish, Elisabeth Moss, Domhnall Gleason, James Badge Dale, Brian D’ Arcy James, Jeremy Bobb, Margo Martindale, Bill Camp, Common, Wayne Duvall.
Directed by Andrea Berloff.

Welcome to a conscienceless and murderous world. The Kitchen is not a domestic room but, rather, New York’s Hell’s Kitchen, an area with a bad reputation in the early part of the 20th century but not looking very good in the late 1970s. Protection is the racket – and, here, no holds barred.

Immersed in this kind of world, one feels the need of some kind of cleansing after emerging from the cinema.

The screenplay is based on comics, graphic novels, and has that kind of imagery and characterisation, some terse aggressive dialogue, subtlety not the order of the day. And, from the beginning of the movies and, certainly, with the development of television crime series, many of us are more or less at home in this kind of mobster world. While we have seen it all before, the protagonists were all men, Capos of Mafia families, wild Irish in the case of Hell’s Kitchen. And the men were thugs, almost unmitigated thugs.

And, as this film opens, 1978, the men dominate, thugs, and particularly brutal towards their wives. The difference here is that the men soon go to prison leaving their wives to struggle with finances, some envelope payments but not enough for needs. What are the wives to do?

So, what is distinctive about The Kitchen (the screenplay written and directed by a woman, Andrea Perloff) is that the women step up to the mark, initially taking over some of the protection, clashing with the local head, taking away some of his men for standover tactics. There are no limits to contracts and kills. Storekeepers who have felt they didn’t get value for money from the protectors are happy to handed over to the women. Needless to say, they succeed, expand, build up a mini-Empire not only in Hell’s Kitchen but extending to the Jewish neighbourhood and with links to the Mafia in Brooklyn.

The women become ruthless, more ruthless and murderous activity than we might have anticipated. And that is the thing about the film, how much do we anticipate? Just because the men go to jail, does it mean that the women step up and simply take their place, do the very same things that the men did? In fact, that is what they do, take over the power, become violent (sometimes gruesomely so), build up their money, increase their greed. It seems that they just become substitutes for the men in the exercise of power whereas the ideal for women stepping into roles and responsibilities that were the exclusive area for men, offers simply more of the same, right or wrong. The women’s movements ideally are for the empowering of women, positive transcending of their previous roles in stasis for the better – not, as has been said, just same kind of substitutes for the men.

One can’t criticise the performances, Melissa Mc Carthy showing that she can be serious, Tiffany Haddish surprising us that she is not limited to broad comic roles, Elizabeth Moss showing that she should be can be assertive rather than mousy. The men, except for Domhnall Gleeson as a calmly unscrupulous hitman, perform as expected.

This is an ugly world where any kind of redemption seems to be solely on materialistic and power levels rather than healing, reconciliation or forgiveness.

1. The title? Hell’s Kitchen? It is reputation? In the 30s? The late 70s and early 80s?

2. The locations, Hell’s Kitchen itself, streets, apartments, stores? The Jewish section? Brooklyn and the Italians? A New York story? The musical score?

3. Protection, mobsters? The Irish in capitals Kitchen? Storekeepers and businesses paying for protection, not getting it? The women taking over, building up an empire, tactics and strategies, gaining power, greed increasing, using violence and murder?

4. The three men, their relationship with their wives, love, mixed race issues, brutality and subjugation? Their agreement to do the job? FBI surveillance? Their being arrested? The court case, in prison, Katherine visiting, the other is not? Irish protection, the envelopes for the wives, insufficient money? The local boss, the jobs?

5. Jackie, the domination of his mother, his character, his control, attitudes, refusing the women more money? His being killed? Ruby and the encounters with his mother, her wanting alone, pushing down the stairs and killing her?

6. The background of Catholic Church, the priests, rituals, especially funerals?

7. kathy, her family, love for her husband, children? Her relationship with her parents, her father’s criticisms about her marriage? Visiting her husband in prison? The discussions with Claire Ruby, coming to a decision, the meetings and agreements, the various steps, visiting the owners and managers, making the deals? Using Jackie’s men for stand over tactics? The success, building up their empire?

8. Kathy, her character, the boss, the Irish background, her kids, wanting to improve the connections, time passing, the greater number of people relying on their protection? Clear, the money, her being determined? Ruby, racial issues, the husband and mother-in-law? Her style of command?

9. Gabriel, his role, in the past, his return, a hitman, the deaths, cutting up the bodies, the bodies in the bath, the techniques, the bodies in the river? The relationship with Claire? Teaching her how to cut the bodies? How to kill? They’re both growing in confidence, the relationship?

10. The vision visit to the Jewish section, issues of protection, connections with Brooklyn? The Jewish meeting, the man dissenting, his being murdered?

11. The visit to Brooklyn, the Italian boss, the car and the driver, the meeting, Kathy and interrogation, the deals? The encounter with the boss’s wife and her caution? The later minding the children? Expansion of business, the contracts, to kill the women? And the revenge in killing the men?

12. Husbands getting out, the meetings with their wives, the repetition of the past, the repercussions?

13. The attack, Claire and her being killed? Gabriel and his wanting revenge?

14. Frank, the clash with Ruby, her shooting him?

15. The FBI agents, the young man and his phone call, his being shot? The revelation that his boss was corrupt, in league with Ruby, engineering the initial arrest? Money deals with her?

16. Katherine, her husband, the talks with her father, going to the Italians, his being killed? The funeral?

17. Ruby and Katherine meeting, taking tough stances, conscienceless, the confrontation and working together? The revelation about Ruby in league with the FBI?

18. The tradition of films about Hell’s kitchen, about protection rackets in New York City?

BUSTER’S MAL HEART

US, 2016, 96 minutes, Colour.
Rami Malek, D.J. Qualls, Kate Lyn Sheil, Sukha Belle Potter, Lyn Shaye, Sandra Ellis Laferty, Nicholas Pryor.
Directed by Sarah Adina Smith.


An unusual title – but, who is Buster?

This film has elements of alternate worlds, science fiction aspects of a glitch in time and place.

Rami Malek, before he was so famous in Mr Robot and his multi-award-winning performance as Freddie Mercury in Bohemian Rhapsody, plays two characters here, the outlaw, Buster, being pursued by the law, and Jonah, with a Hispanic background, married to a reformed addict and with a child, night manager in a hotel.

The screenplay indicates the story of the two men but indicates many of their interconnections. This is the kind of story that makes demands on an audience while it watches the film as well as challenging them to draw out the implications concerning who is who, issues of identity.

Towards the end of the film, there is a sequence where Rami Malek, as Jonah, comes to a fork in the road, is seen becoming two persons, each of them taking each road.

There are echoes of other films, especially for the night manager at the hotel and echoes of The Shining.

1. The title? Arresting? Who is Buster?

2. The narrative, real, surreal, alternate worlds?

3. The settings, the rowboat alone at sea, woods and forests and pursuit, the ordinary home, the church, the hotel, the work of the concierge, the television programs?

4. The initial pursuit of Buster, the sheriff and his squad, Buster as a character, mountain man, hair and beard, the pursuit? In the house, in the bath, the contrast with the boat, floating, the fishing reel? In the house, listening to the radio? The phone calls, the cosmic information, the voices, the last freeman, is turning the pictures upside down, the music – and the rivers of Babylon?

5. The contrast with the world of Jonah, Remi Malek as both characters? At home, his wife and daughter, playing in the bath, respectable, short back and sides, his uniform for his job? The concierge and his being conscientious, the cleaning, the nightshift?

6. The role of the visitor, The Last Free Man, their discussions, the nature of freedom, his not giving his name, working without systems, the discussions, confiding in Jonah? The issue of rules, The Inversion?

7. The theme of the Inversion, the design of the window by Buster, the television information, turning the pictures upside down? A kind of apocalyptic message? The changing world?

8. Jonah, at home, talking with the boss, the nightshift and sleeping? The grandmother in the house, her help, continued critique, prudish and television programs, not wanting the grandchild to learn Spanish as well as English? Problems of money, his arguments with his wife, slaves of rent, plan to get a property, his apology? His wanting to be far away but his complaint that he could get no traction?

9. Life at the hotel, the delayed passengers, the visitor and his stealing, collusion with Jonah? The boss offering the room to Jonah’s wife and daughter, their enjoyment of the holiday at the hotel?

10. Buster in the house, the phone sex, stealing the clothes, continued information about The Inversion?

11. The boss, the hotel corridors like The Shining, the robberies, the boss concerned about Jonah and caffeine? The offer of the holiday?

12. The range of television programs? The animated Modern Times worker as a cog in the wheel? The ominous warnings about the future? Dr Moon and her taking phone calls to explain people’s lives to them? The Last Free Man, his return, his explanation about there being a glitch, Jonah
as a glitch?

13. Jonah, his mental state, the mental state of Inversion? The blood, the death of his wife and daughter? The police, the interrogation? His explanations about the visitor? The surveillance footage and Jonah being alone? Responsibility for the crime?

14. Buster, the boat, the frogs, the blood? His going to the house, his red clothes, the old couple and tying them up, the meals and feeding them, the response of the elderly people, the old man not with it, the wife and her pleading? The trooper coming to the door and Buster fobbing him off? The sheriff identifying him?

15. The funeral, Jonah driving away, the transition to Buster in the boat, the television and his mother with Jonah’s going overboard? The Hispanic background? The television, phoning Dr Moon and her explanation?

16. The glitch in the system, a bug in the system, The Last Free Men sent to fix it, an exterminator?

17. Jonah, escape, the forked roads, as splitting, two men walking on different words?

18. The impact of the epilogue? The two characters? Their lives? Washed up on the shore, images of wife and daughter – The Inversion? Heaven?