TWISTED

Canada, 2018, 90 minutes, Colour.
Elisabeth Harbnois, Morgan Kelly, Kimberly- Sue Murray, Victoria Sanchez, Thomas Mitchell, Michel Peron.
Directed by Philippe Gagnon.

Twisted is a twist title, a thriller about characters with twisted personalities, and a drama with a twist at the end.

A Canadian production, a lot of the action is set in the church (with the parish priest Father Macy allowing a psychologist to use one of the parish rooms for counselling, not looking exactly like a Catholic Church but that is the presumption, pictures of St Therese of Lisieux…). The counsellor has qualifications and is in a relationship with a man who previously had problems and had broken up a problematic relationship with a woman who is going to the psychiatrist for counselling. And her father is head of the police.

The ex-girlfriend begins to make problems for the psychologist, challenging her during sessions, provocative behaviour at the restaurant where she works, threatening and stalking… When complaints are made by the psychologist and the boyfriend, her father says there is an no evidence. When there is a home attack and attempted rape, the psychologist presses her claim.

There is tension between the fiancés. At some stage, audiences may well wonder who is actually the twisted personality and what is the psychology of the psychologist. Interesting in terms of the drama to gauge when it became obvious that there was something wrong with the psychologist.

The ending is more subtle in its explanation that than might have been expected, the psychologist orchestrating everything, leading up to the shooting of her rival, the revelation that she had organised the attack on herself – and the end of the film with her pregnant.

1. Psychological thriller? Twisted personalities? The narrative twist?

2. The Canadian settings, homes and apartments, the church and offices, restaurants? The musical score?

3. Kara’s story, as a psychologist, Father Macy allowing her to use the room in the church, her clients, her relationship with Tyler? The arrangements for the wedding? Her seeming normal?

4. Tyler, genial, his complicated past, the relationship with Elle? Destructive, breaking off? Meeting Kara, loving her, his job, the encounters with Elle, supporting Kara, going to the police for the restraining order?

5. Elle’s story, the twisted past, her relationship, the breakup, the declarations of love? Coming to Kara for counselling sessions, defying her, flaunting the past? Her behaviour in the restaurant? Threats, the issue of the restraining order? Her relationship with her father, his covering up for her?

6. Kara’s other client, her gratitude? The final sequence and the revelation about Kara using the woman for the attacks on her?

7. In the house, Kara’s fear, the police, phone calls, the intrusions, the sexual attack? Going to the police, the police chief and his reaction to save his daughter?

8. The buildup to the final confrontation, Tyler and the gun, Kara having it, the confrontation with Elle, shooting her?

9. At what time did the audience begin to be suspicious of Kara, earlier or later? The solution, Kara pregnant, the future?

10 RILLLLINGTON PLACE (THE STRANGLER OF RILLINGTON PLACE)

UK, 1970, 113 minutes, Colour.
Richard Attenborough, John Hurt, Judy Geeson, Pat Heywood, Robert Hardy, Andre Morell.
Directed by Richard Fleischer.

The Strangler of Rillington Place is the more sensational export title for 10 Rillington Place, Richard Fleischer's film about Reginald John Christie. Christie attained notoriety in the 50's, especially when it emerged that Timothy Evans had been hanged wrongly for the murder of his wife and baby. Christie had killed them along with a number of other women dating back to 1944. Ludovic Kennedy wrote a book condemning Christie and vindicating Evans. The film is based on his book.

The film has a grim, thought-provoking theme. It does not explore Christie's personality very much, although, in Richard Attenborough's effective portrayal, we are shown him at home, fussy, killing, giving evidence at the trial and degenerating into a lonely old age. The film offers him little sympathy and ends with the statement that he was hanged for his crimes.

However. as with Kennedy's book, the human centre of interest is Evans and John Hurt (A Man for All Seasons, Before Winter Comes, In Search of Gregory) gives a performance that is well worth seeing. Evans, a young Welshman, is illiterate but dreams of getting better jobs, boasts about himself, loves his wife but has a flaring temper. He is an easy victim for Christie's quietly menacing persuasion. It is sad to see him hang. (But the film makes no overt statement on capital punishment.)

Richard Fleischer directed the film on the Loeb murder, Compulsion and also The Boston Strangler. He is a competent, if not outstanding director (Che, Doctor Doolittle, Tora! Tora!). The film was made at Rillington Place itself and makes one pause to reflect on the sadness of the criminally insane and the evil that is wrought by them.

1. What were your first impressions of Christie as he committed his first murder? Did this prejudice you against him from the start?

2. Did the film give you any real insight into his motivation. his sanity? Did he have any redeeming features?

3. What was the effect of the environment of the house,, darkness and garden of 10 Rillington Place on the mood of the film?

4. What kind of a man was Timothy Evans shown to be - illiterate, a dreamer, a braggard, genial but violent- tempered? How sympathetically was he presented in the film?

5. What kind of a woman was Beryl - young and inexperienced, loving, frightened of having another baby?

6. When did Christie decide to kill Beryl? Why did he persuade them both he was a qualified abortionist?

7. How did Christie make Evans the victim of circumstances? Did he do it maliciously or did it just grow?

8. Why did Evans do exactly as Christie suggested? Was he capable of doing otherwise?

9. Why did he give himself up? Why did he make such a poor showing at the trial?

10. What were your impressions when you heard Christie’s record of convictions? Did the film evoke any sympathy for him as he endured the trial, quietly spoken and unwell?

11. How did you feel for Evans in the period before his death and when he was hanged?

12. What comment did Evans' hanging make on the value of capital punishment?

13. Why did Christie kill his wife and the others?

14. Should Christie himself have been hanged or been given life imprisonment?

15. How does a film like this help in understanding the criminally insane and the workings of justice?

Created by: malone last modification: Saturday 23 of June, 2012 19:27:39 by malone
edit

 

 

 

 

PAY THE GHOST

US, 2015, 94 minutes, Colour.
Nicolas Cage, Sarah Wayne Callies, Veronica Ferres, Lyriq Bent, Jack Fulton, Stephen Mc Hattie.
Directed by Uli Edel.

Nicolas Cage made several thrillers every year during the 2010 is. While he has some raging and anxious moments here, this is a more credible performance than usual even if this ghost story stretches plausibility.

The film opens with a scene in 1679, local New Yorkers attacking a mother of three children, suspicious of her being a witch. She is burnt at the stake as her three children are executed. While this has an air of mystery for the opening of the film, there is a later, satisfactory explanation.

In the present, Nicolas Cage plays a professor who communicates with his classes, exploring ancient mythologies and poetry. He has a loving wife played by Sarah Wayne Callies, prominent in television series. And they have a young boy, Jack Fulton, who has nightmares, sees mysterious presences outside his window. The parents prepare a pirate costume for his tricking and treating for Halloween. His father, mother reluctant, takes him to the local fair where he suddenly disappears. The father is distraught searching for his son, the mother even more distraught and blaming her husband for his not protecting their son. And the police are involved in the search.

The culminating action takes place year later, both parents still distraught and separated, eventually experiencing what they interpret as some reaching out by their son to communicate with them. He had said to his father before disappearing, Pay the Ghost This leads the father to underground caverns where street people live, eventually returning there and discovering a bridge, two hours opening, from this world to the other world.

The drama is the father crossing to the other world, finding the range of abducted children, finding his son and two other children who also had to pay the ghost.

For an undemanding audience which enjoys a spooky story, this one works fairly well.

1. The title? The opening in 1679, the mother and the deaths of the children? Modern times, the children asking their parents to pay the ghost?

2. The New York City setting? The flashback to 1679, the children in the cellar, the mother protecting them, the mob and the attack on the house, the later images of the execution of the mother and the children?

3. Familiar settings, college and lecture rooms, offices, homes, the streets? The Halloween setting, the children out in the streets, the Halloween fair? The police precincts? The visit to the parents of other abducted children, the slum area, the Chinese restaurant? The underground settlement for the street people? The mystery of the bridge to the other world?

4. Mike and Kristin, the work, Mike getting his professorship? Delayed for the cutting of the pumpkin, cowboy outfits, compensating by taking Charlie to the fair? The ice cream, Charlie's instant disappearance? The frantic search, the police and their advice? Kristin, distraught, blaming Mike?

5. A year later, the separation of the parents, Mike and his being listless and boring in class, his reliance on Hannah and her support? Separated from Kristin? Going to the police, making his demands? The police response?

6. Intimations of Charlie calling out, Mike seeing him on the bus, pursuing the bus, his not being on the bus? Seeing the Pay the Ghost signs, going underground, meeting the Blind Man? Informing Jordan and the police? Kristin and her experiences, in the night, being transformed, carving the sign onto her arm? Believing Mike? Their going to the father of the
abducted girl? Jordan and his visiting the mother at the Chinese restaurant?

7. Hannah, the research, the information about 1679, the crying mother, the mob? Discovery of the portal open for two hours on Halloween? Her death, thrown out the window?

8. Mike, going back to the Blind Man, giving his watch, going across the bridge, into the portal, discovering all the children, finding Charlie, the other two children who came with him? Coming across the bridge, the confrontation by the crying mother, the audience seeing the flashbacks to what happened? The struggle, Mike and Charlie falling off the bridge, climbing back, escaping?

9. Audience relief at the happy ending?

 

 

AFTER

US, 2019, 105 minutes, Colour.
Josephine Langford, Hero finds to fan, Khadija Red Thunder, Dylan Arnold, Shane Paul McGhie?, Selma Blair, Peter Gallagher, Jennifer Beals.
Directed by Jenny Gage.

The meaning of “review� came to the fore while watching After. In fact, older audiences will have viewed this basic story many times over the years so that watching this After is a kind of re-view. But, it is clear that the intention of the filmmakers was not to bring in an older audience. The intention was to make a film for audiences about the same age as the two central characters.

We are told, rather solemnly, Tessa (a generally sympathetic Josephine Langford) that she cannot find the words for what happened “after�. So, we go into flashback into “before�.

There are no particular spoilers in describing what happens in the film! Tessa is an only daughter, protected by her mother after her husband abandoned her and her daughter. Tessa is not only protected but her mother is protective, moulding her daughter so that she will not make the same mistakes. Then, off Tessa goes to college, driven by her boyfriend from high school. We sense almost immediately that he is bound for disappointment.

The film shows as something of college life, mother suspicious of the roommates (nose rings, drug allusions…). Tessa is bookish, wants to study, is challenged to go to a party, trapped in a game of truth or dare. The dare to the dark, enigmatic Hardin (Hero Fiennes Tiffin) who turns out to be the son of the Chancellor of the University is to make out with Tessa. She walks out.

With reference to Wuthering Heights, Hardin is dark, morose, somewhat mysterious (all to do with his alcoholic father and his neglect in England, hence Hardin’s British accent – though he belongs to the acting Fiennes family).

Inevitably, Tessa and Hardin are attracted to each other, proving that the same stories occur over all the generations.

However, there is an emotional twist, Tessa hurt by the manipulations of some in the student group, Hardin and the revelation of a callous secret.

For older audiences there is a pleasure in seeing Peter Gallagher as the professor and a gracious and charming Jennifer Beals as his wife (35 years after Flashdance). And, for older audiences who find it very difficult to watch those other campus comedies, those of the raucous kind, this one is comparatively calm, without those noisy and crude shenanigans.

At the time of After’s release, there was information that a sequel, After We Collided, is in pre-production.

1. The title? The before and after? Tessa’s perspective?

2. The familiar story, over many generations? The romance, the unlikely pairing, the romantic episodes, the disillusionment and disappointment?

3. The film made in Georgia, the city of Atlanta, homes, the University, rooms, the countryside in the woods? The musical score?

4. Tessa’s story, her age, preparing to go to college, Noah as her boyfriend, her mother, her husband leaving her, her protective care of Tessa, preparation to leave, the drive to the University, her mother disapproving of her roommates and their look, manner, styles?

5. Tessa taking the opportunity to have some freedom from her mother, her economics degree, motivations, her love of books? The roommate and the contempt for books?

6. Tessa being forced to go to the party, her roommate and friends? The mysterious Hardin? (Echoes of Wuthering Heights…?) Tessa uncomfortable, the truth or dare game, testing whether she was a virgin, opting for dare, for Hardin to make love, her walking out?

7. The gradual change, Hardin and his more gentle approach, Tessa’s response, the romantic interludes, at the college, in the countryside, special places? Audience responding to each of the characters and their love?

8. The house, the owners away, Hardin inviting Tessa to move in? Their life together?

9. Noah, his visit, Tessa returning home after being with Hardin, his upset? His telling Tessa’s mother, her concern and visit, finding the two together?

10. Hardin, his father, the professor, the story of his past drinking and neglect of his son? His marrying again, the charm of his new wife? Her son, student, initially befriending Tessa, becoming something of a confidant?

11. The spiteful friend, texting Hardin, Tessa upset, following him, the revelation with the video, Hardin and his dare? Is Trying to explain to Tessa? Audiences believing him not?

12. The dramatic presentation of After? Anticipation of Then Afterwards?

SHAFT

US, 2019, 111 minutes, Colour.
Samuel L.Jackson, Jessie T.Usher, Richard Rountree, Regina Hall, Alexandra Shipp, Matt Lauria, Titus Welliver, Method Man, Isaach De Bankole, Avan Jogia, Luna Lauren Velez.
Directed by Tim Story.


Once upon a time, almost 50 years ago, a slick-talking investigator called John Shaft made quite an impact on the American semi-going public, especially the African-Americans?. It was part of the introduction to a number of black heroes of the period, crime dramas, investigations and tough tactics, action films that are looked back on with appreciation after 40 or more years. Richard Rountree was John Shaft – and made another film, Shaft in Africa.

At the beginning of the new millennium, Hollywood thought it was a good time to have another Shaft film. From the screenplay of the 2000 Shaft, it seemed that Richard Rountree was the uncle of the new hero, the new John Shaft, and who better than Samuel L.Jackson? More of the same in glossy style, plenty of action, and directed by John Singleton who had made a number of significant films about African-Americans? in the 1990s.

In the screenplay for the 2019 Shaft, it seems that Richard Rountree is actually Samuel L Jackson’s father. And, here is a next generation, John Shaft Jr. So, there is a bit of explaining to do. Back we go into the 1990s, Shaft senior and his wife (Regina Hall) coming under heavy fire from a gang of drug dealers. And their baby son is in the back seat. It seems too much for his wife, so Shaft goes on his way, leaving his wife to bring up their son (and, in a collage of gifts, sending inappropriate presents for the boy’s birthday).

Which leads us to the present day, John Shaft Jr (Jessie T.Usher) who could not be more unlike his father if he tried (it would seem that his mother did her best that her son be not like his father). And we certainly see the differences between the 1970s, the 1990s and the present. John Jr is a walking millennial – his education, his cultured manner, his style of clothes, music, language, disdain of guns, working for the FBI but at a desk, data being the object of his investigations. What will happen when the two meet?

On the one hand, there is the expected crime investigation, a follow-up from that initial car shootout from the 1990s, warnings about Islamaphobia and suspicious money dealings at a mosque in New York, huge drug deals with vehicles repatriated from Afghanistan and bringing in loads of heroin, friendships and betrayals, thugs in the street, drug bosses, money-laundering, hits issued on both father and son. This happens when Jr’s best friend is killed and he begins an investigation while being put down by the FBI boss (TVs Hieronymus Bosch himself, Titus Welliver). So far, what was expected.

But, of course, so much of the film is about the bonding, the contrast between father and son, the dialogue, some even throwing guns out the window (but, of course, turning out to be a perfect shooter). There is the visit to the mosque and the different dealings in how to dialogue. There is exasperation of the father, his Samuel L.Jackson style, language, relationships (though still pining for his wife), Is Learning to live in an IT world while still appreciating that personal contacts, phone at most, are more effective than texting! So, a lot of banter amidst the action.

John Jr is millennial reticent in his dealings with his girlfriend (Alexandra Shipp).

So much happening while we wait for Richard Rountree to turn up – as he does, not just in a mere cameo, but some humorous comment as well as definitely getting into the action, all three in the mayhem shootup.

Iconic being as the three, similarly dressed, stride out into the traffic, ignoring the oncoming cars.


1. The generations of the Shaft family? From the 1970s to the 21st century?

2. The change in style from the 70s to the 21st century, the visualising of action sequences, violence? The role of blacks and whites? The role of the law, Private Investigators? The different clothes, the music styles, manner of speaking?

3. The Millennia’s, their education, attitude towards violence and guns, the Me Too Movement and attitudes towards women, the developments in data gathering and cyber skills?

4. The dialogue between the generations, fathers and sons, old style and modern developments? Clash, complementarity?

5. The opening in the 1970s, Shaft, his relationship with his wife, the drug leader and the attack, the shooting the car, the baby in the backseat? Shaft and his quest, the 25 years? His leaving his wife, her love for Shaft, but the dangers, and bringing up their son?

6. The visualising of the years passing, Jr as a baby, child, growing up, and the gifts from his father – useful or not?

7. The 21st century, John Jr and his working for the FBI, well educated, terrorists, Islamophobia, drug issues? His cyber skills, data gathering? His offering to be an agent, rejection by the boss?

8. John Jr and his age, education, earnestness, the epitome of trends, the touch of mockery towards the Millenniums their clothing style, trendy foods? His relationship with Sasha, her work at the hospital, his reserve towards her? Meeting Frankie, the discussion, the bond between them, memories of the past, his war service, drug addiction? The news of his death? The enquiry, his offering to be the lead agent, his being put down?

9. His going to solve the case, getting the information from the boy in the street, paying, Manuel and the thugs? The confrontation, his being bashed? His decision to go to his father for help, the office, the receptionist, the women, his father amazed to see him? Their talk, styles, opposites? His father making the link with his own case and the drug dealers? Helping his son, yet using him? The visit To Manuel and the thugs, the shooting, the interrogation, Manuel fleeing? Going to the club, his contact, getting the information?

10. The visit to the mosque, interrogation, the Imam his hostility, his daughter and her relationship with Frankie? Their being ousted, Frankie and the building, the developments? The documents, the lead about the money, the money laundering? The visit to Benny, her hostility? Her setting hits on them and the attacks, the shootings? Jr leaving the camera on her desk? The evidence?

11. Shaft, his style, relationship with his wife, the years of gifts, his relationship with women? Investigator? Language? Taking Jr to the club, the girls, the drink and the dancing, the aftermath?

12. Going to the organisation, Brothers helping Brothers? Suspicions, Frankie and his role, veterans from Afghanistan, the interrogation, suspicions? Cars coming back from Afghanistan, for repair, hiding the drugs? The links with Benny, the mosque as a cover? Frank and comfortable, his death?

13. John Jr’s mother, his not wanting her to know he was with his father? The date? The gentleman friend? Shaft at the restaurant, the conversations, her trying to avoid him? The shootout? Getting the date’s car? Going to the restaurant, John and his being with Sasha, the meal? The assassins, the shootout, John and his shooting skills, yet not wanting the gun? Previously throwing guns out the window?

14. Going to see Shaft’s father, a cameo by Richard Roundtree, age, experience, wisecracks, action? His armoury? Sasha and the abduction? Going to the building, the technology, the elevator, the tricks and the attack?

15. The mayhem, the criminals, Sasha, her being saved, the shootout? The confrontation with the drug boss, Shaft taking the bullet for his son, the drug leader shot, out the window and falling to the ground?

16. John Jr as the hero, going back to the FBI, some self-satisfaction, his refusing the promotion? Not wanting to work for “the man�?

17. The three generations walking the street – iconic?

ANNABELLE COMES HOME

US, 2019, 106 minutes, Colour.
Vera Farmiga, Patrick Wilson, Mckenna Grace, Madison Iseman, Katie Sarife, Michael Cimino, Samara Lee, Steve Coulter.
Directed by Gary Dauberman.

We are noticing that film franchises which tend to increase and multiply are being characterised as a “Universe�. This third Annabelle film is now part of The Conjuring Universe: two Conjurings with a third for 2020 and the spinoff, The Nun.

Fans will know that Annabelle is a mysterious doll but, as we are reminded now, she is not possessed by evil but she is a channel for evil and malevolence in the world, demonic powers wanting to seize souls through her. As the film opens, she is being brought home for their museum of malevolent objects, by Ed and Lorraine Warren whom we have met in the other films.

In fact, Ed and Lorraine Warren were actual characters (despite the statement at the end of the film that none of the characters bears any resemblance to actual people). From the 1960s then for the best part of 40 years, they were involved in strange experiences, the best-known being the Amityville Horror and its exorcism. They continued working in the US (and also at Enfield in London, a television film being made of the story). In fact, they were media celebrities and, as we consider newspaper headline here, the question is raised “hero or hoax?�. And they have been played in the films by Vera Farmiga and Patrick Wilson.

After a few mild adventures and Lorraine having a clairvoyant vision of characters standing outside a cemetery in the dark, they bring Annabelle home and lock her in her glass case. They then go off to a conference, leaving their young daughter, Judy (Mckenna Grace) in the care of a very nice babysitter, Mary Ellen (Madison Iseman) who is dressed and behaves like a nicely-bred teenager of the 1970s.

While the first part of the film seems very mild, PG kind of entertainment, there is nothing particularly gory or grisly about the horror. It is probably best described as “spooky� rather than “scary� although, of course, there are some scares. (One reviewer, inured to horror films even use the word “cosy�.)

Most of the action takes place overnight, a lot of it in the dark as the evil powers are arbitrary in lights going on and off, television sets turned on and off, stereos… It may have been a quiet night at the Warren’s except that Mary Ellen’s friend, Daniela (Katie Sarife) is much more forward in her manner, very curious (and a kind of moral for the film would be “curiosity killed the cat – or almost�).

Actually, the plot is a little more complex because Daniela has a secret and wants some help in contact with the spirit world to resolve her sense of guilt.

So, many things go bump (and variation sounds on bump) in the night, including a mysterious werewolf presence outside where Bob, the nice young man from the supermarket who serenades Mary Ellen at the window, has an opportunity to save Judy when she has to go outside to the car to get Mary Ellen’s inhaler (it is that kind of domestic spooky drama). Of course, there is a lot more, especially when Daniela unlocks the door of the Museum, ignoring the warning about not touching anything. Plenty of spooky mayhem, threats to Daniela, troubles for Mary Ellen and Judy, a challenge to get Annabelle back in her class case – and lock the door!

Ed and Lorraine get back, give some kindly advice to Daniela, thank Mary Ellen, meet Bob, and Judy, fearful because she felt she was not liked at school, having everyone turn up to celebrate her birthday party – which does mean that so much of the film is rather cosy!

There is a final photo of the actual Ed and Lorraine and Judy with the information that Lorraine died in 2019.

1. The cinema world of the Conjuring films, characters, stories, presence of evil, exorcisms?

2. The role of Ed and Lorraine Warren? In real life, the facts, the fiction about them, their being celebrities, exorcisms, Amityville? Working in England at Enfield? The media? The cases involved, the museum and closing evil in one room? Lorraine Warren dying as the film was released?

3. Annabelle, the introduction of the doll, the spinoff films, her mediating evil but not possessed?

4. The Warrens and their cases in the 1960s and 70s? This film from the 70s? Their work, in the car, going home, the scenes of the highways, the suburbs, the homes, the streets, school, shops? The musical score?

5. The main part of the film in the interiors, the range of rooms, the museum? The henhouse? The lawns outside?

6. The screenplay presupposing The Conjuring stories and the Annabelle stories? Her malevolence, but not possessed, Channel for evil entering into the world, wanting to draw souls? The Warrens keeping Annabelle safe, locked in the museum?

7. The drive home, the car, and fixing it, the eerie atmosphere, Lorraine as clairvoyant, the people at the cemetery gate? The truck almost running over Ed? Their being lost?

8. Annabelle, safely home, locked in her case in the museum?

9. The Warrens having to go to a conference, Mary Ellen coming to be the babysitter, her age, appearance, style, attractive? The contrast with her friend, Daniela? The encounter with Bob at the store? Minding Judy, Judy self-conscious, Anthony bullying her at school?

10. Coming home, Judy, her age, personality, response to Mary Ellen? Daniela coming into the house, curious, her motivations about the accident, intruding?

11. The night, Mary Ellen making the birthday cake, the anticipated birthday? Bob arriving, the pizza man and the delivery, his gross comments? Bob not coming in? The 70s and the touch of propriety amongst young people? Bob and his serenading?

12. Daniela, her snooping, the effect of her touching everything? Her motivation, the photo of her father, putting it in the container, imagining his presence, the horror touches?

13. Mary Ellen, nice, her work, Judy going to bed? The image of the mysterious bride and her knife? Annabelle at the case, in the bed with Judy, dragging Judy down?

14. Bob, serenading, the comic touch, the experience of the werewolf, saving Judy, hiding in the chicken shed?

15. Daniela, deciding to go, finding she had the keys, the return, unlocking the museum door, the mementos, their coming alive, evil? The touching everything?

16. The range of experiences because of the museum, the house, the lights on and off, television, stereo? Phones ringing? The fierce warrior and his eyes, the characters with
coins on their eyes? Bumps and movements and sounds in the night? Mary Ellen and her needing the inhaler, Judy going out to get it? Daniela, the experiences, her being stabbed
yet not dying, her becoming possessed?

17. The range of mayhem, recovering Annabelle, putting her in the case?

18. The parents coming home, the party for Judy, people not turning up, then everybody coming?

19. The photo of the Warrens and their daughter – and the tribute to them?

20. A somewhat PG kind of horror film, minimal body count, not gory, some shocks – spooky rather than scary?

FUN, MOM, DINNER

US, 2017, 81 minutes, Colour.
Katie Astleton, Toni Collette, Bridget Everett, Molly Shannon, Adam Scott, Ron Huebel.
Directed by Alethea Jones.

It is initially surprising to find that this film has an MA rating. As it proceeds, with very frequent coarse language, some quite explicit, as well as sexual gossip and references, the rating seems more relevant.

But, without so much coarse language and sexual references, the story is basically PG, and, despite the night out on the town by the four mothers, it finishes up, like so many American raucous comedies, opting for traditional values, especially for fidelity in marriage, for the family.

The film is in the tradition of the Bad Moms films but, in short running time (and written and directed by women and supported by the central cast) it is a story that harassed and sometimes frustrated mothers will identify with.

There are comparatively few men in the cast, two husbands, two men at the bar in the club, and a rather nerdish bespectacled, non-alcohol-drinking man who could well appear in a sequel marrying the divorcee in the group. There are two husbands, one, Tom (Adam Scott) caught up in his work, apprehensive about parenting his children, not showing affection to his wife. The other, Andrew (Ron Huebel), while still a touch macho, has worked out how to be supportive of his wife and co-raise their four children. The main action for the two men in the film is firstly, at the dinner, where Tom is obtuse; the second where he takes the children to Andrew’s house while his wife has her night out. They have quite some discussion about how they function as husbands and fathers, recognising the needs of their wives.

While the film shows some action around the school, introducing the four mothers and their families as well as interactions of friendship at the school and also some clashes with the traffic supervisor, the main part of the film is the night on the town.

Katie Aselton is Emily, the younger mother, marriage to her high school sweetheart, he becoming more insensitive and job occupied over the years. She has been befriended by Katie, Toni Collette being raucous, who has four children, has the loving husband, clashes with Melanie (Bridget Everett) a strong-minded big and buxom traffic supervisor who, of course, we will see has something of a heart of gold. The fourth mother is divorced, played by Molly Shannon. Emily persuades Katie to come with her to the night out even though she is quite reluctant – but, after a clash with Melanie and a meeting of minds, she joins in with gusto.

This gives the four of them opportunity to indulge in some women behaving badly, initially fighting amongst themselves, then the drinks, then the smoking and the drugs, driving around the town, stopping for drinks at a bar, Emily attracted by the man behind the bar and going off with him, alarming the others who get caught up in the karaoke enthusiasm and then have to go to try to find Emily (with the nerdish man driving the car and helping with the search).

Meanwhile at home, the kids are watching television, a crying baby is put on a swing outside and immediately goes to sleep, the door slams and the men are locked out. However, Katie’s husband is tracking her on his phone and is aware of what is going on.

By the end, the girls have confided in each other, have enjoyed their night on the town, experienced some freedom – which is visualised the next morning as they are all friendly school.

On the one hand, a pity about the language for many ordinary mothers watching the film – and on the other hand, it may be reflective of how some of the mothers think and feel.

TOY STORY 4

US, 2019, 100 minutes, Colour.
Voices of: Tom Hanks, Tim Allen, Annie Potts, Tony Hale, Keegan- Michael Key, Jordan Peele, Madalyn Mc Graw, Christina Hendricks, Keanu Reeves, Jay Hernandez, Joan Cusack, Bonnie Hunt, Kristin Schaal, Wallace Shawn, John Ratzenburger, June Squibb, Carl Weathers, nonrecourse, Jeffrey Garlin, Timothy Dalton, Laurie Metcalf, Mel Brooks, Carol Burnett, Betty White, Carl Reiner, Patricia Arquette, Bill Hader, Flea.
Directed by Josh Cooley.

To infinity – and beyond! And, of course, “you’ve got a friend in me�. Part of our consciousness, part of our positive attitude towards life!

And, since 1995 with the first Toy Story. Pixar animation made a great impact and began a series of highly successful entertainments, Oscar winners, and further Toy Story adventures. Now, after almost a quarter of a century, here is Toy Story 4. And, all our toy friends are back, led by Woody and Buzz. And, for our delight, there are some new characters including For key, a twisted but genial fork, and, a variation on a Ken-doll, a stunt motorbike rider, dashing but a bit slow on the uptake (and voiced with a touch of parody by Keanu Reeves.)

The story takes us back nine years when Andy was passing on his toys to his younger sister. Some of the toys were going to other owners, especially Bow Peep and her sheep. While this is sad, she has a philosophy of toynness that toys must move on to new and loving owners. On the question is, should Woody go with her. One of the messages of the film is that the whole reason for being a toy is to be the object of love from the child owner. Later, the film will become rather misty eyed for the audience as Woody has to go through this whole process for himself.

The plot complications this time include the youngest child, Bonnie, going to school, Woody hiding in her schoolbag, and her being bullied by some of the children. Then, she goes on a road trip with her parents, the toys going along as well.

There are various adventures, with four key getting lost and being taken by a problem-doll, Gabby Gaby, who feels unloved and unwanted and would like to have Woody’s voicebox to attract a child. She holds onto four key and, Woody, ever compassionate, is willing to give his voicebox to save Porky. There is a visit to an antique shop as well is the discovery of Beau Peep. Then various complications with toys getting lost, the family driving home, Woody and the plan for rescues, with bows helping out (listening to his “inner voice� by pressing buttons on his chest), Gabby Gaby finding a lost little girl and Woody organising for the little girl to find Gabby Gaby.

Not quite yet happy ending, while all the toys finally land up together after various separations, the question arises again about Woody going on to find other owners who will love and appreciate him. The last words of the film itself, Woody starting and Buzz finishing, “to infinity – and beyond�.

The invitation is to stay for the early parts of the credits because, in fact, there are a lot more words, comics situations as the toys go to the local fair and help the children to win all the prizes at the shooting gallery.

As always, there are a lot of style voices which enhance the comedy and the entertainment value. Couple of more years, we suppose, before Toy Story 5.


1. The popularity of the series? The 25 years? The characters and situations?

2. The popularity of the plot, toys alive, loyalty to the children? The toys reason for being – for the children?

3. The animation style, familiar, humorous?

4. The range of voices, the familiar voices, the new? The jaunty score and the songs?

5. The situation, Andy and his being finished with toys, passed on to Molly, being passed on to Bonnie?

6. The initial rescue sequence, RC? Woody and his heroism? Bo Peep and her leaving? Life to go on in the family? The role of toys to move on to other owners? Woody and the temptation to go with her?

7. Bonnie going to school, the bullies and the arts and crafts and her loss? Woody in her bag?

8. The character of the Sporky, Forky? Origins, seeing himself as a tool, downplaying himself? Discussions with Woody? His becoming Bonnie’s favourite?

9. The road trip, Forky going out the window?

10. Bo Peep, her reappearing, in the search? The encounter with Gabby Gabby? Her goal, to have a child owner, her loss of voice, her attacking Woody, Gabby Gabby and Forky?

11. Bo Peep, with Gabby, seeing the little lost girl, going to her help, her delight in having the doll? Reunited with her parents?

12. Buzz Lightyear always popular, his involvement in the search, listening to his “inner voice� and pressing the buttons?

13. The carnival, Buzz becoming a prize, escaping? The encounter with the new toys? The cop, Duke Kaboom and his exploits? The Ken-doll kind of character (and the touch of satire with Keanu Reeves’ voice and tone?

14. Woody, willing to give his box voicebox to Gabby, in exchange for Forky?

15. The hiding the backpack, in the antique shop, the owner of the shop and her help? The other toys going back to the family?

16. The comedy with the car and its controls, the malfunctions? Finding the bag in the shop?

17. Everything restored, the farewell, Woody torn as to whether to go or not, the decision to go, with Bo Peep? The last words of the story with Buzz and Woody complementing each other with “to eternity… And beyond�?

18. And the added comedy of the fair and the prizes during the credits?

TOLKIEN

US, 2019, 112 minutes, Colour
Nicholas Hoult, Lily Collins, Patrick Gibson, Anthony Boyle, Tom Glynn- Carney, Pam Ferris, Craig Roberts, Harry Gilby, Colm Meany, Laura Donnelly, Derek Jacobi.
Directed by Dome Karukoski.

To say that over the last 20 years, with the film versions of The Lord of the Rings and The Hobbit, courtesy of Peter Jackson and his cinema imagination, there is a potential audience of millions for this portrait of J.R.R.Tolkien. The question is, of course, who is the author and what was he like, where did he come from, his family, his education, war experiences, and how did they combine for his classic writings?

For audiences wanting some kind of biographical information, there is enough for them to go on with, his early years, education and war, marriage, the beginnings of the family and this film ending with the publication of The Hobbit in 1937. There was a lot more to come, the creation of The Lord of the Rings, the friendship with C.S.Lewis.

For audiences wanting some kind of insight into Tolkien’s imagination, there are many clues and indications. His mother was a great storyteller for the children. He created stories while he was young, moving from South Africa after the death of his father, to the British countryside and then, after the death of his mother, living in a boarding house and then going to an upper-class school. He had created a mythical language, vocabulary, grammar. He was inventing stories – with this film giving indications now and then of the mythical dimension, warriors riding through the countryside, fellowships. But, he loved linguistics and excelled at University (under the tutorship of the professor played by Derek Jacobi).

And then, there was his intense experience of World War I, the immediate enlistment, the horrors of life in the trenches, going over the top, young men being literally blasted by fire, thousands of deaths, visuals of ponds of blood surrounded by mounds of corpses.

The other strong impact of the film is Tolkien and his friendships at school, the bonds between the club, a true fellowship which continued at University. In fact, fellowship is almost the most significant theme of the film. There is also his falling in love, his marriage, beginning a family.

Nicholas Hoult has made a variety of films since he was a child actor. Here, he is the embodiment of Tolkien (and, at 5‘ 3 “, he towers over his friends). Lily Collins plays Edith whom he met when they were young and whom he marries.

A number have commented on the meagre indications of his Catholicism (later he was to be one of the translators for the Jerusalem Bible). Colm Meany players Father Francis, a friend of the family who helped the orphans find accommodation and schooling.

Perhaps there will be a further film on Tolkien and the writing of The Lord of the Rings and his friendship with C.S.Lewis. That would enhance this present portrait of Tolkien.

1. Audience interest in Tolkien, his life, his books, the background? The influences?

2. The prewar setting? British countryside? Birmingham, homes, schools? Oxford and the University?

3. The re-creation of World War I, the atmosphere and enthusiasm, posters? The contrast with France, the battlefields, the trenches, going over the top, the hospitals? The aftermath?

4. The war sequences, the special effects, the men going over the top, the bombardment, men on fire? The horrors of war? The pond of blood, the mound of corpses?

5. The family background, South Africa, the death of the father, the mother and children coming to Britain, the work, mother and her stories, her death? The help of Father Francis? The children as orphans? Tolkien and his brother? The meeting with Mrs Faulkner, boarding, meeting Edith? Life in the Faulkner household? Mrs Faulkner, kind, but disciplined?

6. Tolkien going to school, the interviews, the boys and their snobbery? Playing rugby, the fight, going to the principal, the principal being his rival’s father, discipline, their having to work together?

7. The bonding between the young men, their meetings, school, discussions in the library, the particular talents of each one? Going to the University, Tolkien and his interest in language, creating mythical languages and Abel to speak them, the impact on the teacher during the class?

8. At University, studies, one friend the pianist, the other a painter, the other a poet? The characters, friendship, the meetings and the good fellowship, the emphasis on fellowship? The disapproval of parents? Tolkien and his encouragement?

9. The outbreak of the war, the enthusiasm, all enlisting? In France, the trench sequences, news of deaths? Tolkien and his experience of the war, illness, searching for his friend, his adjutant and his continued help? On the battlefield, fire all round, Tolkien’s collapse, in hospital?

10. The growing bond with Edith, falling in love, her response, her character, Tolkien missing his opportunity, her love for someone else? Yet, the farewell at the wharf as he went to war? The waiting for him, going to find him in his recovery? Their marriage?

11. The poet’s mother, Tolkien going to see her, the past encounters and her not wanting her son to be a poet? His interview, persuading her to have the poems published, his offering to write the introduction? Her grief at so many deaths in her family?

12. The intercutting of the war sequences with the action? Tolkien in war and the imagination of battles? Mythological?

13. Tolkien, his studies, his drinking, unreliability? The dealings with Father Francis and support?

14. The urging to meet the linguistics professor, the encounter, his being late for the academic year, his use of language, enthusiasm, the response of the professor? His writing the essay in short time, his being accepted? This contribution to his creative imagination and creating Middle Earth?

15. The immediate postwar period, his work at Oxford, respected by the students, Edith and the marriage, the children, his writing his books, the creation of the Hobbit, the scene
in the countryside with his brother and the two families?

16. The film ending just as Tolkien’s literary career was opening up? Oxford, The Lord of the Rings, C.S.Lewis all in the future?

THE WRONG BABYSITTER

Canada, 2017, 89 minutes, Colour.
Daphne Zuniga, Britt Irvin, Matt Bellefleur, Lisa Marie Caruk, Lochlyn Munro.
Directed by George Mendeluk.

This is a kidnap thriller made for television, a film from Canada with an American setting.

The focus is on an artist played by Daphne Zuniga whose husband, detective, was murdered several years earlier while working on the case. Their daughter intends to work for the police. The occasion for the murder was investigation of a kidnapping.

Now, the daughter is kidnapped but shows her resolve leaving clues for her mother and the police to follow. She has been kidnapped while the next door neighbour, a sympathetic friend who runs the administration in the school, has been babysitting.

The kidnappers are fairly incompetent but are eager to get ransom money. Twist is that one of the kidnappers is the younger brother of the next-door neighbour who has masterminded the whole situation and, in fact, has killed the detective husband.

The mother and her friend are suspicious of the local policeman, her husband’s partner, and pursue the clues themselves, information from a local garage, a message from the daughter written on the wall of the toilet, calculating the melting of ice cream…

The policeman also picks up a number of the clues and works out who the villain is and, with a siege, all resolved.