ALL IS TRUE

UK, 2018, 101 minutes, Colour.
Kenneth Branagh, Judy Dench, Ian Mc Kellen, Kathryn Wilder, Lydia Wilson, Sam Ellis,
Directed by Kenneth Branagh.

Cole Porter’s breezy lyric advises us to “brush up your Shakespeare…�. This was to urge audiences to get to know the plays, their plots, famous lines which have become even more famous quotations. However, this film is an invitation to brush up on Shakespeare, the person, the family man, the character behind his plays. This is not an easy task because not so much is known about Shakespeare himself – and there have been various contenders as to the author of his plays, some suggesting Francis Bacon (with the joking remark about Charles Lamb’s book, that we cannot get bacon from Lamb’s Tales!) And there was that very entertaining film of 2011, Anonymous, working on the comic hypothesis that Shakespeare was a rather ignorant actor who took the public responsibility for the work done by the Earl of Oxford!.

With Kenneth Branagh playing Shakespeare, we know that we are in pretty safe hands. And the screenplay was written by Ben Elton, with his characteristic touches of the comic, but some wonderfully serious insights into Shakespeare and his family.

The title comes from the part title of The Tragedy of Henry VIII, the play that was being performed when the Globe Theatre burnt down in 1613. It led to Shakespeare returning home and this is the scope of this story, from 1613 to 1616 when he died.

The make-up artists did quite some work on Branagh’s face to make him look like Shakespeare, the touch of baldness and the longer flowing hair. But he sounds like Branagh and deliver speeches, with quotations from the plays and from the sonnets, like Branagh. And, extra value, Judi Dench plays 26 Hathaway. Many have found this something of a difficulty because Anne Hathaway in reality was only eight years older than her husband whereas Judi Dench is a quarter of a century older than Kenneth Branagh. However, as expected, Judi Dench gives a powerful performance.

There is an added bonus in a sequence where the Earl of Southampton visits Shakespeare at Stratford-upon-Avon?, one of those intense conversations, and he is played by Ian McKellen?.

Shakespeare was certainly not the perfect husband. He spent most of his time in London rather than at home with his family. According to the screenplay, this was compounded by his grief at the death of his son, Hamnet, at an early age. He was devoted to the boy, more than to his two sisters, Judith and Susanna, appreciating the poetry that the boy wrote – and, there is a great deal of intensity and powerful dramatic conflict in the discussion with Judith and with Anne about the origins of this poetry.

So, Shakespeare returns home, spends a lot of time working in the garden, in some ways making up for lost time in getting to know his daughters – with a manufactured scandal against his daughter, Susanna, and Judith, seemingly low self-image but speaking frankly with her father and her gaining confidence, even to her getting married.

Branagh directs and gets great performances from his cast, especially in the conversations with Judith (Kathryn Wilder). Which means that we are introduced to a different Shakespeare from what we might have imagined, admiring his genius – and there are many references to plays and sonnets throughout the film – but seeing his personal limitations, the strains with his wife (Anne Hathaway not being able to read but finally being taught and finally able to sign her name on the marriage certificate). And Shakespeare finally comes to some peace with the death of his son and the sadness of the circumstances.

In many ways, this is a somewhat low-key film, modest in its scope – but opening up a much wider world of human relationships, the stresses of a family where husband and father is one of the world’s greatest geniuses.

1. Audiences and the response to Shakespeare? Admiration for his literary genius? Interest in his life, his work? His final years?

2. Kenneth Branagh, his experience of Shakespeare? Judi Dench and her long career? Ian McKellen? The supporting cast and their working with the director in the staging of Shakespearean plays?

3. The film’s history, invention, imagination, plausible? Elton screenplay, comic and serious? The references to London, to the Globe Theatre, to the different plays and quotations? Anne and her knowing the plays, having seen many of them?

4. Kenneth Branagh as Shakespeare, age, the make up, the hairstyle? His background in Stratford, his father considered a criminal, his son liking him? Anne and the relationship, her being older, the pregnancy, the marriage? The family, the children? The importance of the son, Hamnet, his appearing in Shakespeare’s imagination, the poems, wanting to end his story? Shakespeare’s devotion to Hamnet at the expense of the girls? Grieving his death, trying to discover the truth, Judith and her explanations, Anne and her agreeing? His search, going to this cemetery, getting the documents, the final information, Hamnet drowning? And saying he died of plague?

5. Shakespeare going to London, writing his plays, managing the theatre, his reputation, the references to the other playwrights of the time, Marlowe et cetera? His not being at home?

6. The character of Anne, as played by Judi Dench, age, her life as a girl, pregnant, marrying Shakespeare, remaining in Stratford, the death of Hamnet, bringing up the girls? Her not being able to read? Her life without her husband, the touches of resentment, the reference to the two beds (and Shakespeare leaving the second best one to her in his will? Her love for her daughters?

7. Shakespeare returning, working in the garden, preoccupied with Hamnet, the poetry, wanting to learn the truth?

8. Susanna, her marriage, her daughter? Her relationship with her husband, her father? The accusations, the reputation, suffering? The accuser, his denunciation? Her husband, support?

9. Judith, remaining at home, not marrying, her relationship with her twin? In the town, the shopkeeper, the attraction, the possibility for marriage? Her image of herself? Her mother’s support? The revelation that the poems were hers, that Hamnet wrote them down? The difficulties between them, the taunting Hamnet about Shakespeare, his being upset, drowning? Judith blaming herself? The mother supporting her? Her being freed in her self-image, meeting the shopkeeper, his reputation, with women, the pregnant girl, birth and death? His taking responsibility? The wedding, happiness, Judith and her pregnancies and the deaths of the children?

10. The visit by the Earl of Southampton, Ian Mc Kellen’s performance, the local aristocracy wanting to fawn on the Earl, the Earl’s contempt? The importance of the long discussion with Shakespeare, the Earl supporting him, Shakespeare’s infatuation, the poems, their content and style? The Earl, age, admiration for Shakespeare, reciting the sonnet, his leaving?

11. The importance of the conversation sequences in the film, the discussions with Anne, the review of their lives, their hopes, disappointments? The importance of the conversation with Judith, the intensity of the relationship, the revelation of the truth, the effect on each of them? The final conversation and letting Hamnet go?

12. Admiration for Shakespeare, disappointment in his treatment of his family, the final years, his illness and death?

13. The nature of the title – and insights into the truth of Shakespeare, as a person, as an artist, his vision and understanding of human nature, the conversations with the would-be poet, Shakespeare’s advice on drawing on experience?

ALADDIN

US, 2019, 128 minutes, Colour.
Will Smith, Mena Massoud, Naomi Scott, Marwan Kenzari.
Directed by Guy Ritchie.

The young potential audience for this new version of Aladdin, live action, will probably have seen the animated version of 1992 (and more than once), with that hyped performance by Robin Williams as the voice of the genie and the animation enabling him to swirl into all kinds of alternate disguises and all kinds of comic, even manic, voices. And, for the youngsters who saw it back in 1992, they are now in a position to indulge in a guilty pleasure of watching this version even as they take their own youngsters, the age they were when they first saw Aladdin.

And, this might be the best comment to make, it is definitely a family outing.

Most of us are familiar with the basic story, the young thief in the city, the Princess in the palace, the evil vizier with political and power ambitions, the lamp in the cave, rubbing the lamp and the genie appearing offering three wishes (urging that the third wish be for the genie himself and his freedom!), the magic carpet…

And, back in the 90s, there were those wonderful songs, the triumphant entrance of Aladdin, A Whole New World on the carpet, A Friend like Me… And there are some more songs, especially in the 21st century greater emphasis on the role of the Princess, her being a strong character, not wanting to be married off, noting that there has always been a Sultan but that he was always male and that she is a strong candidate for a female Sultan. And she has a song with an emphasis in the lyrics that she will not be: speechless.

This is a wonderful and spectacular land, the city itself, the palace on the hill, the sea, ships, lavish costumes and decor, bright design, even brighter colours. Plenty to excite the eyes.

While Mena Massoud is a genial Aladdin, adept at thieving, more than adept in infiltrating the palace, in love with the Princess (though thinking her the maid at first), becoming a victim of the vizier, giving up his claims when exposed – but finally, of course, coming to the rescue.

British Naomi Scott is beauty and charm, not without some toughness, as the Princess.

And, of course, the question on the minds of all the adults, at least, who are waiting to see the genie – will Will Smith, seen live, be better than Robin Williams’ comic style or not. Obviously, quite an unfair question. Will Smith does his best, a genial genie, smiling, singing, wisecracking, and some special effects enabling him to be like the animated genie of the original film. Will Smith likeable, and engaging genie.

Jafar is sinister. Aladdin’s monkey is mischievous.

So, plenty to entertain – for audiences of all ages.


1. A family outing? Appeal to adults and children?

2. The remake, expectations, live action interpretation? Memories of the animated version?

3. The exotic settings, the city and its detail, the buildings, the hills, the Middle East and style? The water? The interiors, costumes and decor?

4. The songs, dramatising each of the characters, dramatising situations? Their popularity from the 1990s and expectations here?

5. Aladdin, his age, his work as a thief, his companion monkey, his dwelling? The thing in the street, the encounters with people, his friendliness, the encounter with the princess, her anonymity, taking the bread, walking the poor? They’re talking, stealing the bracelet? The hairpiece and his declaration that he would return it?

6. The princess, her disguise, her being kept in for protection, her relationship with her father, with the vizier, the support of her made, the intention that she should be married, the visiting Prince and his awkwardness, the touches of comedy?

7. Aladdin, infiltrating the palace, mistaking the maid for the princess, the promised to return? The princess waiting and his not keeping his promise?

8. The vizier, his appearance, sinister, with the guards, the images of the cave in the past and its collapse, wanting to send in the, his power over Aladdin? The warning, to take no jewels, the abundance of wealth inside, the monkeys temptation? Getting the lamp, climbing the rocks to get it? The collapse?

9. The vizier, his past story, poor, his ambitions, power in the kingdom, wanting to invade neighbouring countries? Hakeem, the question of loyalty is to the Sultan? His decision to take a stand against the vizier?

10. Rubbing the lamp, the appearance of the genie, Will Smith, his look, his patter, the many images of him, the comic variations? His songs? The thousand years, confined in brass, explanation of the wishes, his wanting to be free Western Mark the return to the city, the genie getting them out of the cave, the first wish? Aladdin wanting to be the Prince? The huge entourage, the lavish procession, everybody watching?

11. The reception, Aladdin and his brash comments, the dancing performance, his awkwardness, the conflict with the genie? Everybody’s reaction? The genie and the attraction to the maid and vice versa?

12. The magic carpet, the rides, a whole new world? The princess, talking with the Latin, talking about the monkey, and knowing the truth, but believing him to be a Prince in disguise?

13. The vizier, his threats, wanting the lamp, the various struggles to get the lamp? The buildup to the confrontation, the vizier, his wishes, wanting to be all-powerful, wanting to be a genie – and reduced to going back inside the lamp?

14. Aladdin, his return home, despondent, but wanting to help the princess, getting the Sultan’s praise? The laws and the possibility of their changing? The marriage?

15. The framing of the story with the Mariner, his wife, children, singing the songs – and the genie and his freedom?

JOHN WICK: CHAPTER 3 – PARABELLUM

US, 2019, 130 minutes, Colour.
Keanu Reeves, Halle Berry, Ian Mc Shane, Laurence Fishburne, Mark Dacascos, Asia Kate Dillon, Lance Reddick, Tobias Segel, Anjelica Houston, Said Taghmaoui.
Directed by Chad Stahelski.


This is one of those screen franchises that took off, perhaps unexpectedly, from the first John Wick film, and, one might say, the resurrection of the career of Keanu Reeves. Then the sequel was more successful and might have been expected. And, for the devotees of John Wick, this chapter 3 has proven to be all that they wanted.

It seemed best to consult the meaning of Parabellum with reference to the title. It means preparation for war – and, is also suggested, that for those who want peace there is a necessary preparation for war. To that extent, this chapter 3 is definitely the preparation, practice one might say in attack, killing, defence, strategies, for an upcoming chapter 4. With the car final confrontation in this film and the taking of sides, the film just stops, knowing that the fans will be demanding a sequel and a conclusion.

For those not in the know, coming in to see this film could be quite a shock. A quick summary might say that it is a collection of many episodes of fights and killings, a great number of killings (in the Casablanca episode, quite a diminishment of the population). For those who have not experienced John Wick before, this is 130 minutes of brutality, graphically choreographed, almost like a summary manual of how to kill, with physical strength and manoeuvres, with guns, knives, and, particularly striking open(literally for the victims) horses bucking their back legs.

For those who would find this too brutal, it is an almost unrelieved succession of fights to the deaths – with some moments of relief with Tchaikovsky and Nutcracker ballet.

It is interesting to note that one of the words that recurs throughout the film, not a word that one uses frequently in real life, these days, is fealty. There is a high table of international criminal authority, subsidiary action “under the table�, and an unyielding demand for fealty to the authorities. (One hopes of this kind of international organisation, was an extraordinary Wall Street -like Central bureau with charts for million-dollar bounties on enemies, and especially those members who are now “excommunicated a�.

John Wick is being chased, has a deadline before he becomes excommunicated, makes contact with supportive connections, is condemned, $14 million bounty, and, before you know it, he is in Casablanca confronting Halle Berry, then rescued from Saharan dunes, back to the US – and generally wearing the same suit and tie all the time!. Kiana Reeves has never been noted for being an articulate actor – which suits his one-note, multi-physical manoeuvres, screen presence as John Wick.

Exciting for some, monotonous for others, action-packed for some, brutal for others, tense plot for some, an absurd story for others.

POKÉMON DETECTIVE PIKACHU

US, 2019, 104 minutes, Colour.
Ryan Reynolds, Justice Smith, Kathryn Newton, Bill Nighy, Ken Watenabe, Chris Geere, Suki Waterhouse.
Directed by Rob Letterman.

There is something of an age barrier to enjoyment of this Pokémon story. It is not the world of older audiences. But, looking back to the introduction of Pokémon stories and Pokémon activities, Japan in the 1990s, we realise that those who were children enjoying Pokémon in those years and now the parents of children who are at home with Pokémon could well enjoy this film.

The story exists in an alternate world, like enough to the world we live in, cities which have a blend of American cities and London, and so quite familiar. But, of course, the Pokémon make a difference. They seem to be something of a blend of pet, friend, even guardian angel for the human that they accompany. There is communication – but not through human words.

We are introduced to a human, Tim Goodman (Justice Smith) whose life is somewhat disturbed by the absence of his detective father away in the city. A friend tosses him a Pokémon which he catches – and so has a companion, leading him to travel by comfortable train into the city. He confronts a detective to find out what has happened to his father, whether he is alive or not. The Pokémon’s name is Pikachu, small, bubbly, mischievous, but he has lost his memory!

Tim also meets young journalists, Lucy (Kathryn Newton) who becomes entangled in the investigation. And, in the city, is a famous patriarch and benevolent industrialist – so that is what Bill Nighy is doing in this film! He is benign but has troubles in collaborating with his son.

So, the scene is set with all kinds of complications, especially work in a secret laboratory, the creation of a giant Pokémon who seems to be a threat, as well as a gas which has an overpowering effect on humans, enabling the pet Pokémon to absorb the human!

While older adults might be struggling with the plot lines and developments, one hopes that this is second nature to the youngster audience!

As always, things are not what they seem, even Pikachu is not what he seems and we share his pleasure in discovering who he really is. And discovering Ryan Reynolds.

Which means that this is an entertainment for Pokémon devotees (but leaving oldies in the audience somewhat struggling).

1. The history of Pokémon, popularity, Japanese origins, Pokémon folklore?

2. The development of the video games, the Pokémon hunts, the variety of characters?

3. An alternate world, the blend of American, the London buses, an alternative metropolis?

4. Tim, his friend, the Pokémon gift, tends memory of his father, detective, going to the city, leaving him? Catching the Pokémon?

5. The laboratory, the experiments, the scientists, the seeming monstrous Pokémon, the escape, the crash, injuries to the detective, the Pokémon surviving?

6. Tim, the train, travelling to A rhyme City, the interview with the detective, memories of his father? Not believing he was dead? Going in search?

7. Howard Clifford, his son, the explanation of his work with the Pokémon, in his wheelchair, at his desk, the TV interview, his heritage? Clashing with his son? Audiences thinking in the hero and the sun the villain?

8. Pikachu, size, appearance, voice, Ryan Reynolds? Losing his memory? Collaborating with Tim, his aspirations, collaborations? The search?

9. Humans and Pokémon together, friends, pets? Companions? The range?

10. The encounter with Lucy, her ambitions as a journalist, getting stories, her being discouraged but persevering? With Tim? Her Pokémon and the clash with Pikachu?

11. Tim, the search, the big Parade, the discovery of the gas, the research? Lucy and her story? The elaborate Parade, the letting loose the gases, the Pokémon is absorbing the humans?

12. The visit to the bridge, the scene coming into the present, the discovery of the truth, the laboratory?

13. Clifford some, his double? His father being exposed?

14. The creature, the escape, it’s turning out to be friendly? Clifford and his aims, to survive in the Pokémon’s?

15. The final confrontation, Clifford, his death, his son as hero, giving Lucy a job? The revelation that Pikachu was Tim’s father’s Pokémon?

16. Restoration,, to meeting his father, the reconciliation?

POMS

US, 2019, 91 minutes, Colour.
Diane Keaton, Jacki Weaver, Celia Weston, Alicia Beau, Charlie Tahan, Rio Coleman, Phyllis Somerville, Pam Grier, Bruce Mc Gill.
Directed by Zara Hayes.

Whatever happened to Annie Hall? Of course, she had a long topline in career as Diane Keaton. But, on the evidence of Poms, she has been overdosing in recent decades on the Bring It On movie series, that range of popular movies for teenagers spruiking recruits for cheerleading. Which means that the Poms in the title does not refer to the British but rather to pom-poms from the cheerleading paraphernalia. (Maybe Bring It On 41 - or more - could be an alternate title for this film!)

This is senior cinema. Or, perhaps, it could be referred to as cinema for seniors – and it was released around Mother’s Day, a number of bloggers noting that they took their mothers to see it and a happy time was had by all.

So, here is Diane Keaton over 40 years since Annie Hall playing variations on the theme. At time of filming, Diane Keaton was 72 – but, in the final cheerleading sequences, she reminds audiences that agility from many at age 72 is not impossible.

She plays Martha, a frustrated older woman who had spent a lot of years looking after her mother who suffered from cancer. Now she has been diagnosed with cancer herself. She packs up, sells her belongings on a street market, gets in her car and drives to Georgia, to a rather lavish retirement village (spacious, comfortable single houses, golf courses, pools (indoor and outdoor) where she is greeted by a welcoming committee, Celia Weston playing, Vicki, the obnoxious manager and leader of The Southern Belles. And everybody is expected to join a club or, failing that, create one of their own.

Martha can be agreeable and, at times, she can be prickly. This is immediately tested by her neighbour, Sheryl, who is ultra-extroverted, cheeky and indiscreet. This is a top co-starring role for Jacki Weaver (who needs fewer rehearsals to play this kind of character). Despite a difficult beginning, the two women become friends and Martha decides, to compensate for lack of cheerleading progress in her past, to create a cheerleading club. Vicki and her followers vote against it – but the two friends audition a number of women who have music and movement talent who have ben judged to be past their use by date. There is Pam Grier who used to be that tough African-American? crime fighter in the 1970s. There is Rhea Perlmann, forbidden to audition over his dead body – which becomes rather literal.

And, of course, plot-formula steps in, playing to an audience which enjoys the formula and seeing how it works out. Can this group of women at 70+ years of age enter a cheerleading competition and be successful (not necessarily winning but certainly engaging audience exuberance)?

They rehearse, list their ailments, the sharp opposition by one of the women’s selfishly-protective son, engage one of the school cheerleaders to coach them, try out at the school to their humiliation (and a clip of their performance going viral on the Internet), Martha not telling anyone about her terminal illness.

So, can they be successful? Of course, they can. And we, the audience, especially those not as young as we used to be, share their enthusiasm, their performances, their overcoming any prejudices of the young. Senior cinema – but also reassurance for, perhaps, an apprehensive next-generation, and some enthusiasm for younger audiences who appreciate grandparent success.

Not made for awards but for an entertaining night out (and some propaganda on behalf of oldies living a more active and healthy life).


1. Senior cinema? Cinema for seniors? Cinema for the apprehensive next-generation? Sympathetic response of grandchildren?

2. The popular formula, audiences enjoying it?

3. Cheerleading in the United States, the reality, sports events, movies about cheerleading? Competitions?

4. A film to encourage the elderly, those unwell, not giving up?

5. Diane Keaton as Martha, memories of Annie Hall, packing up, selling her stuff, the customers? Her story, childhood, ambitions, caring for her sick mother? Looking at her photo? Her age, cancer, resignation? Cancelling her doctor’s appointments?

6. Transferring to Georgia, the drive, set Centre? The Greeting Committee, Vicki and Her control, the Southern Belles? Introduction to Chief Carl and to Doris? The tour, the lavish grounds, Golf Courses, Pools? Her house?

7. Sheryl, Intruding, Cheeky? Extroverted, the noise next door, Martha calling Carl, Sheryl Invitations, hiding in the house? The discovery of Bend living in Sheryl’s house, grandson? Sheryl in the invitations, going to the funeral wakes with all the free food? Sheryl going to the school, the sex classes on video? The clash with Chloe?

8. The idea to form the group, everybody belonging to a club, Cheerleaders Club, Martha and her memories? Submitting the idea to Vicki and the committee, being turned down?

9. The auditions, the range of women, their skills, Agility? Alice, the visit, her reluctance, Asking her husband, over his dead body, the immediacy of the funeral? Alice and a change of manner, making up for lost time? But still awkward in the movements?

10. Vicki, control, forbidding the hall? Sheryl’s idea, blackmailing Martha to teach Ben to drive? Going to the school?

11. The range of rehearsals, listing the ailments, going to the school, the performance, the accidents, the video, going viral? Their reactions? Helen and her injury, the harsh visit of her son?

12. Blaming Chloe, going to her house, the extravagant party, Chloe’s apology, agreeing to be the coach, the consequences? Ben, crashing into Chloe’s car? Playing the Music, attracted to Chloe reserved? The range of moves, the exercise regime and, looking at themselves in the mirror and declaring what they liked about themselves?

13. The buildup to the competition, Martha and her collapse, illness, Sheryl persuading her to go?

14. The enrolment for the competition, hiring the bus, deceiving Vicki, Carl with Vicki in the cart and avoiding Vicki? Carl pulling rank with the organiser not wanting the old women to enter?

15. Going to the competition, the uniforms, the pom-poms, rescuing Helen, her son and his insulting Chloe, Sheryl forcing the apology?

16. The performance, the audience enthusiasm, joining in (the scenes during the final credits)?

17. Martha, exuberance, her death, the advertisement for generals and fireworks? The actual fireworks?

18. The aftermath, one year later, in the competitions, in memory of Martha?

19. A film of hope and vitality?

THE ABC MURDERS

UK, 2018, 180 minutes, Colour.
John Malkovich, Rupert Grint, Andrew Buchan, Eamon Farren, Shirley Henderson, Freya Mavor, Anya Chalotra, Tara Fitzgerald, Christopher Villiers, Eve Austin, Michael Shaeffer.
Directed by Alex Gabassi.

The ABC murders is one of Agatha Christie’s most popular novels and features her Belgian detective, Hercule Poirot. It was filmed in 1966 by the company who made the Margaret Rutherford Miss Marple films, given a light touch with the casting of Tony Randall. And, of course, it was filmed with David Suchet as Poirot.

When first screened on British television, the bloggers were outraged. This was not Agatha Christie’s story, plot details changed at, characters dropped, others introduced. And, of course, John Malkovich did not fit expectations of Poirot. The blame was laid on the writer, Sarah Phelps, who had already adapted several Agatha Christie works for television, And Then There Were None, Witness for the Prosecution, Ordeal by Innocence.

For those interested in a different interpretation of Poirot, this version is very interesting. It is 1933 but he is retired, living alone, morbid in his memories – especially of his migration to Britain in 1914 (and there are echoes of hostility to foreigners with posters and antiforeign badges on several of the characters), his experience of the German attack on a village and the fate of the villagers in the church. This eventually has an explanation which would have astonished Agatha Christie.

There is a succession of murders of people with the succession of letters of the alphabet in towns with the same succession of letters. Suspicion of the audience is on Alexander Bonaparte Cust, a stocking salesman, alone, eerie, subject to seizures, renting a squalid flat from a blousey Shirley Henderson, loved by her daughter. He is an all the scenes of the crimes and stockings are involved. He is played by Eamon Farren.

He is the only suspect and the attention is given to the murders, the characters, their families and associates, though a mistake is made in the identity of the ventriloquist who was to be murdered in Doncaster and somebody else killed by mistake.

Poirot goes to see his old friend Inspector Japp but he dies. The next generation of Inspector, over self-confident, played by Rupert Grint, now older and more serious than his character, Ron, in the Harry Potter films.

Of course, the solution is ingenious, most of the murders as a cover for the main target – and a final explanation sequence where the salesman has been set up and is innocent. And one of the motivations for the murder and its style is a resentment towards Poirot from the past.

And, finally the motivation is given for the retired Poirot – and of all solutions, he is a priest in Belgium wanting to save his parishioners from the attacking Germans but failing, the church set on fire – and Poirot wanting to avenge the dead by investigating murder mysteries.

1. The classic Agatha Christie story? The variety of film versions? The comic version with Tony Randall? The classic version with David Suchet? This adaptation to the 21st-century sensibilities while keeping the 1933 setting?

2. Period, London, the notices for patriotism and the reaction of the police, especially towards Poirot? Poirot’s lodgings, police headquarters? The settings for the various killings? The towns and their atmospheres? The letters of the alphabet? And for the characters? The train guide and its being opened at each letter?

3. Poirot, in retirement, the memories of his past success? The opening up of his past before World War I? The invasion of Belgium, the death in the field, the upset? Poirot on the ship? The story of the birth at Andover? Records and enquiries? His relationship with Inspector Japp, the visit, Japp and his collapse and death, the funeral? The clashes with Inspector Crome, younger, arrogant, not collaborating? His visits to Poirot? The invitation to a brandy? The police searching for towns with D? Poirot being the code?

4. The choice of John Malkovich to portray Poirot? Older, his appearance, tinting his beard, the dye running? Accepting the grey beard? His manner, speech, the touch of accent?

5. The opening, the credits, the typing of the letters? The introduction to Cust? His look, manner, clothing, typewriter, his sales goods? The landlady, slovenly, critical, his taking the room? Her daughter and the interaction? The old man upstairs?

6. Cust, typing the letters, the challenge to Poirot, the personal tone, the indication of the alphabet, the town, the names of the victims? His visits to the towns, the evidence of the stockings and the packets? His seizures? Abstract at breakfast, then sick? The daughter and her massage, treading on him, his wounds?

7. Poirot, the first town, the woman in the shop, Cust and his visit, her death? The Inspector not believing Poirot, his going to the town, finding the body? The second murder, the filling out of the story, Betty, stealing her sister’s boyfriend, her callous attitude, money, at the cafe, flirting with Cust, the stockings, her refusing to pay? The brutality of her death? The mother’s grief, her mother thinking her daughter was perfect? The cynical attitude of her sister, Poirot’s visit and the tea?

8. The mansion, the wealthy, the dinner, the secretary and the wife throwing the wine over her? The wife’s collapse, mental condition, physical condition, Miss Gray ringing for the doctor? Her painful illness? Flora kissing Sir Carmichael, his firing her? Taking the dog, the brutality of his death, the book? Poirot phoning, not preventing his death? His visit? The flashbacks to the party, the birthday murder? Hermione talking with Poirot, seeing the man like him?

9. Franklin hiring Poirot, gathering Megan and Donald and Miss Grey? Donald and his tantrum? Megan and her explanation about her sister? The flashback and her memory of the man in Poirot’s clothes?

10. The visit to Doncaster? Dexter Dooley and his puppet? His clash with the man sharing the dressing room? The death and ABC’s error? Paddington underground and the phone call and the note?

11. Crome, his believing Poirot? Their working together? The role of the media, Crome and his sceptical assistant?

12. Poirot as the code, the interviews, going to the factory for the stockings, the explanation by the owner? The documentation, an address? Going to the house, the flight, the contents, the landlady her attitude? Her daughter, love for Cust, trying to save him?

13. The letter E? The town, people apprehensive? The toilet, the murder?

14. Cust, his being in the town, his seizure, his escape, dropping his coat? The collapse? Hospital?

15. Miss Grey, her ambitions, the relationship with Franklin? Her wanting to inherit? Hermione surviving?

16. Poirot, with Franklin, the fingerprint? The confrontation? The motivation, his wanting his brother’s title? Remembering the party, Poirot and entertaining with the murder game? Jealousy and rivalry? Trying to outwit Poirot, his choosing Cust, playing backgammon, setting him up, the flat, the job, the typewriter, the connection with the stockings sales, giving him destinations, accommodation?

17. Megan, her being stuck in her grief, her favours? The grieving parents?

18. Franklin, his arrest? The interview with Poirot, the requested meal? The long explanation, Franklin in the writing of the letters, his shrewdness, the mistaking Doncaster, his fate?

19. The continued flashbacks to the war, the German attack, the soldier in the fields, the people on the church?

20. The shock to discover that Poirot was a priest, the previous scene where he encountered the priest and resisted the advice? His protecting the people, confronting the German soldier, the burning down of the church, the death of the people? As a motivation for his wanting to avenge those who had been murdered?

21. Speculating on Agatha Christie’s response to this version of her story – and the interpretation of Poirot?

MY BIG GAY ITALIAN WEDDING (PUO BACCIARE LO SPOSO)

2018, Italy, 92 minutes, Colour.
Diego Abatantuono, Monica Guerritore, Salvatore Esposito, Cristiano Cammaco, Dino Abrascia, Diana del Bufalo, Beatrice Arnera.
Directed by Alessandro Genovesi.


Ethnic big weddings got an enormous boost many years ago with that big fat Greek wedding in Chicago (and its sequel). There have been lots of wedding movies, many with the touch of the extravaganza, and here is another. And, of course, a difference.

The film began life as an off-Broadway play – and, quite a number of times throughout the action, it slows down for strong conversation sequences, quite arresting in their content, but played very conventionally, the camera looking at one character to another, intentionally leaving the words to speak for themselves (but with rather flat visuals).

Other than those sequences, in fact, the play is opened out considerably, with early scenes in Berlin, a trip to Italy and the South and an extraordinary location of a town built on top of a mountain with a vast causeway bridge leading up to it.

And these are the settings then for the gay wedding.

The main protagonist, Antonio, is introduced as a charming young man, engaging with his friend, Paolo, both of them trying to get auditions as actors in Berlin. Then, Antonio proposes (and is accepted) and the adventures begin. There is a most irritating character in the film, Camilla, who grew up with Antonio, is infatuated with him, his breaking off an engagement with her, her stalking him in the streets and, most awkwardly for all, stalking him when he gets home to celebrate the wedding. And she does a star disturbing upset at the wedding!

There is also their landlady, an eccentric young woman, who interviews a prospective roommate who turns out to be, to put it mildly, eccentric. And that is to do with cross-dressing.

So, a group of unusual characters turning up in this southern Italian town where Antonio’s father is the mayor, a huge man, presiding over the town council, encouraging tolerance towards refugees who will build up the town which is in process of economic collapse.

The first issue is telling Antonio’s parents – and we have anticipated the results, the father with a homophobic touch, the mother who has been aware of her son’s orientation for a long time. There is also the issue of the demand that Paolo’s mother, and they have been estranged for three years, must attend the wedding.

Which reminds us of the Italian setting and Catholic morality traditions. They arrive in Holy Week and there is a traditional Passion procession throughout the town with Antonio as Jesus. It is a setting for a gay wedding in southern Italy, same-sex marriages being legal, able to be conducted by the town’s mayor. There is also a sympathetic Franciscan Friar whose forte is not Canon Law but who looks at the portrait of Pope Francis on the wall and insists that love, authentic love, should be the criterion for relationships, echoes of “who am I to judge?�.

There is a de-consecrated church in the town which seems to provide an attractive setting for the marriage, a professional brought in for decoration, the town council seeing the opportunity for tourism (while the mayor attacks them for wanting to turn the town into Queeropolis).

There is quite a bit more drama to go, fire to the church, Camilla and her histrionics – but, Antonio’s father has not been impressed by his son’s and Paolo’s involvement in musicals in Berlin. Of course, how to end this film? Obviously, a musical, the whole town involved, with the touch of the Busby Berkeleys.

While this is all done with the light touch, there are, of course, serious themes underlying the drama and comedy, issues of same-sex marriages, the law, religious traditions, acceptance over and above tolerance, and all these issues given a human face. Which should help give that dimension to those involved in discussions, whatever their stances.

1. The title? Echoes of fat Greek weddings? An Italian version? Gay version?

2. The tone of the title, families and weddings, approvals and disapprovals? The issue of a same-sex marriage?

3. Based on and off-Broadway play? The long conversation sequences? But opened out?

4. Legislation throughout the world for same-sex marriages, in Italy, civil marriages, the Catholic tradition and moral issues?

5. The cheery introduction to Antonio, seeing him, his addressing his fiance? At home, his proposing to Paolo? But not using the word love? The plan to go back to Italy and Antonio to tell his parents, Paolo estranged from his mother? Camilla stalking Antonio, the confrontation, the history of growing up together, the engagement, his being gay, breaking off, the drunken encounter at the club, her obsession and emotional clinging to Antonio? Paolo not quite in the know?

6. The Berlin settings, the apartment, auditions for acting, Bernadetta, wealthy, the landlady, not working? The visit of Donato, to share the flat, his story, bus-driving, marriage, his love for dressing up in women’s clothes? Not wanting to be alone, going to Italy as well?

7. The town in Italy, high on the rock, the causeway and walking up? The town itself, homes, the streets, the town council rooms, the and consecrated church?

8. The Catholic tradition, the Passion procession, the hooded devotees, the Franciscan, the choir, the followers? Holy Week and Easter?

9. Antonio and his father, his father as the mayor, the meetings, the council, the issue of refugees, the failing economy? The later meetings, wanting the same-sex wedding, for tourism? The mayor and his attack on Queeropolis?

10. Antonio, his cheery character? Paolo, more stable, but also emotional? The revelation at to be table, the mother knowing all the time, the father shocked? His criticism of musicals and disapproval? The mother’s conditions for the marriage, that the mayor perform the marriage, that Paolo’s mother attend?

11. The preparations, the wedding planner, the decorations, the flowers and the crucifix, the deconsecrated church? The Franciscan, the discussions, his approval, quoting Pope Francis and authentic love as criterion? The use of the old church?

12. Antonio’s father, disapproval, his wife ousting him, sleeping and eating at the mayoral rooms? His setting fire to the deconsecrated church, his having to be rescued?

13. The visit to Paolo’s mother, her hostility? Donato and his problems, discussions with Benedetta, dressing up, his impersonating Paolo’s mother? The actual mother being there?

14. The father, his relenting, the ceremony?

15. The Millers presence, stalking Antonio, the conversations, his coming down, the kiss, Paolo seeing it, miss trust? The ceremony, Camilla wanting to be a witness, her denunciation of Antonio, Paolo walking off, Antonio singing – and the ceremony going ahead?

16. And the only way to bring the film to an end – the wedding reception, in the open air, and extravaganza musical, singing and dancing?

17. Continuing controversies in some countries about same-sex marriage? The human face of the issue – at its impact on people no matter what their stances?

MEN IN BLACK: INTERNATIONAL

US, 2019, 114 minutes, Colour.
Chris Hemsworth, Tessa Thompson, Kumail Nanjiani, Rebecca Ferguson, Rafe Spall, Emma Thompson, Liam Neeson.
Directed by F.Gary Gray.

Way back (way back!) In the 1990s, there was a revelation that there was a special Institute, the Men in Black, who worked secretly, worked undercover, to protect humans and Earth from the “Scum of the Universe�. And a strange array of special effects creatures dramatised the threatening point.

After the recent release of Pokémon, Detective Pikachu, and the reminder that Pokémon emerged in the mid 1990s as well, there seems something of a thematic connection. And that connection is that, by now, a lot of the creatures have become buddies of the Men in Black, each protecting each other’s back. Which, of course, is not to say that there are not a lot of villains who have heightened special effects evil powers.

Way back then, the older Tommy Lee Jones and the younger Will Smith were partners. This time, there is a 21st-century question mark concerning the title (and the same with X-Men): men only or women and men. Of course, the question is asked openly here, especially concerning the new Agent M, young Molly from Brooklyn, who had experienced the creatures back in 1996, especially the little one who was her pet. Highly intelligent, she has interviewed for the CIA but has been on the track to find the Men in Black and to be recruited. The question is strongly acknowledged by Agent O, strongly in charge, strongly played by Emma Thompson.

But, the head of the Institute is played by Liam Neeson, Agent High T, initially seen partnering the up-and-coming, Agent H in Paris. Transitioning from Thor, H is played in his comic, offhand flair style and banter by Chris Hemsworth.

Actually, the whole thing is an absolute extravaganza of eccentricity. There are settings of Paris, London and Marrakesh (and out in the Sahara) with their ordinary day-to-day lives as well as the substructure of the creatures taking refuge on Earth. Lots and lots of special effects (especially the vast canyon in the Sahara). Lots and lots of weird characters – the range of planets and galaxies certainly does produce the weirdest of creatures.

Tessa Thompson, who appeared with Chris Hemsworth in the Avenger films, she playing Valkyrei, is serious and intelligent as Agent M, initially on probation, caught up with the fairly lackadaisical H, affirmed by High T, but eyed with some suspicion by a rather prissy Agent See (Rafe Spall). There is a growing suspicion that there is a mole in the Institute.

There is mayhem in the London club. There is confusion and threat in Marrakesh. There is a visit to a castle on top of a rocky crag in the Mediterranean, the home of a seductive and evil mastermind played by Rebecca Ferguson (and a happy reunion between Molly and her pet creature). But, for humour and entertainment, there is the introduction of a small creature, Pawn, in service of the Queen. When the court is attacked and the Queen dies, Pawny, offers loyal fealty to M. His presence leads to quite a lot of comic sequences as well as plenty of observations, comic remarks, all with the Pakistani/American accent of actor, Kumail Nanjiani (The Big Sick).

All familiar in its way but an undemanding and popular kind of entertainment for the fans.

1. The popularity of the franchise? From the 1990s? The role of the Men in Black, protecting earth from the “scum of the universe�? The older generation? The new generation? Creatures from other planets living in harmony with humans?

2. The comic book background of the stories? Wild imagining? The visualising of the creatures, the range, look, sound, behaviour? The presence around the world, Paris, London, Marrakesh?

3. The new generation, the new title? International? And the significance of women in black, Hnt O? Molly, the encounter when young, her ambitions, wanting to join, searching out the Men in Black? Her being the equal – if not superior to the other agents?

4. The opening, the Paris sequence, H and High T? Interactions? Personalities? High T disliking Paris? The Eiffel Tower, the lovers, the attack from the galaxies? H and the elevator?

5. Brooklyn, 1996, Molly, her family, the invasion, her pet, small, chatter? Her parents’ memory loss, her surviving?

6. Molly, grown-up, CIA interviews, the job, on the alert for the Men in Black, tracking them down, the creatures, moving through the fence? The taxi, the pursuit? Her going for the interview with,Agent O? Her stern tone? Becoming probationary?

7. The head office, the range of agents, the intergalactic creatures? The mechanism for detecting the creatures? High T and his welcoming Molly? H and C and his interference?

8. The episode in Marrakesh, the city, the streets, the merchants, the headquarters for the creatures? The murderous twins? Leading to their coming to London, the chief creature, his wanting to go out on the town, H and his background, the high life, liaisons? The night club, the dancing, M and her alertness, her getting the machine and hiding it in her pocket, not informing the authorities? The attack after the dance, the explosion, death?

9. High T and always defending H against C, H and his nonchalance? C and the insinuations about a mole in the organisation? His suspicious behaviour, going out and taking control, criticisms?

10. The return to Marrakesh, pursuing the twins? The merchant with the bike? Riding the bike, soaring through the air, out into the desert? Exploring the machine turning into a gun? The explosion of the vast rift?

11. The pawn, in service to the Queen, the attack, the death of the Queen, Pawny and his wanting to serve Molly, deference to her? His character, his size, adventures? His comic voice – with the touch of the Pakistani accent? His participation in the adventures, the comic turns?

12. The decision to visit the island and Riza? The past encounter with H? Her enormous assistant? The guards, with H, M climbing the cliff? The arguments, taking possession of the gun, Molly and the fight with Riza? The big creature, bodyguard, and his turning out to be Molly’s pet from the past?

13. H and the issue of the mole? His realisation that he had been neuronised? The realisation that High T was the mole, ambitious, the confrontation in Paris, the Eiffel Tower, T transformed into the gigantic monster? His destruction?

14. Agent O, reviewing the situation, M no longer probationary, her job in New York, H and his promotion, the approval of C?

15. And the couple finally driving off and into the air? To a possible sequel?

BRIGHTBURN

US, 2019, 90 minutes, Colour.
Elizabeth Banks, David Denman, Jackson A. Dunn.
Directed by David Yarovesky.

The title of Brightburn lives up to its name but certainly not in a way that we might have expected. It is not as glowing or as hopeful as the title may sound.

Instead, this is a small science fantasy, a focus on the family, but a family with an enormous difference.

As we watch Brightburn, we might be reminded of the close encounters tradition, or the Roswell tradition and speculations about UFOs, or the body-snatching-by-aliens tradition – and, we might be reminded of those esionage films from the Cold War period, of Russians trained when they were young, migrating to the S US, infiltrating middle American society, waiting for the right time to be activated.

Most of this is certainly not in the minds of the central characters. Tori and Kyle, a pleasantly ordinary couple, are desperate have a child. They are played very genially by Elizabeth Banks and David Denman. They have something like a Superman-Smallville? experience when, right at the beginning of the film, a small space vehicle lands on their property, a baby as the only passenger. So, nice parallels with Clark Kent as their little boy, Brandon (Jackson A Dunn) bonds with his parents, has numberless photos and home movies taken. Elizabeth Banks plays his mother lovingly-devoted with great zest. David Denman is a hard-working father who bonds with his son, referring to him as “Buddy�.

Who is he really? Why did he come to earth? Will he be another Man of Steel? In a way, he will, but not in the way that any of us, including himself as a child, could foretell.

He is an obedient boy. But his parents puzzle about his not bleeding. We puzzle about his not really showing emotions or weeping. And he is continually drawing a specific develop design in black and red.

His 12th birthday party is not quite a success and everyone notices that he is beginning to change. Is it puberty? Is it something more?

Well, of course, to say anything more would be to reveal spoilers and this is a film which is better seen with successive surprises, twists and plot puzzles – and, it might be said, not a great deal of explanation offered.

Which means, then, that a great deal is about to happen. What will be his parents’ response? How will the sheriff and his assistant become involved? What about the little girl from school that he likes and her aggressive mother?

All this, and more, in only 90 minutes, a fine variation on themes for those who really enjoy this kind of science fiction. And, there are images during the final credits which might delight as well as tantalise conspiracy theorists.

1. The title? The town in the county? Brandon as Brightburn?

2. Science fiction, aliens? UFOs and conspiracies? The apocalyptic ending? The future vision during the credits?

3. The plausibility of the plot, the explanations, the lack of explanations?

4. The parallel with Roswell, UFOs, the Cold War and political Russian sleepers to be awakened in the United States?

5. The introduction to Tori and Kyle, the books on fertility, their attempts at conception, the disturbance in the night, the landing of the spaceship? Their experience, adopting Brandon? The mystery about him, the hiding of the spaceship in the barn? The later memories of the past and the landing, Kyle and his nightmare?

6. The collage of images of Brandon growing up, baby, videos, a loving family?

7. After 10 years, Brandon and his personality, loved by his parents, obedient, but rather impassive, not shedding the blood, not weeping, at school, his continued drawings of the symbol, being able to answer questions about bees and wasps, the approval of Caitlin? The trust exercise and the students fallen, Caitlin moving away, Brandon collapsing and hitting his head?

8. The celebration of his birthday, the candle in the cave, the gift of the gun from Noah, Kyle’s bad reaction, the leaving? Brandon and his defiance?

9. Tori, her character, loving mother, Brandon as her fulfilment, the continued devotion and attention? Her being puzzled about his behaviour, the puberty explanation? His breaking Caitlin’s hand? The visit to the principal? Tori in denial, especially answering Kyle about Brandon?

10. Kyle, good man, work, not wanting Brandon in the barn, Brandon working with him at various jobs, his calling him buddy, his love for Tori, his friends, the drinking and the pool games, an ordinary man?

11. Brandon discovering his powers, the games of hiding in the barn, his continued drawing of the symbol, starting the mother and his being upset, is flying through the air?

12. Caitlin, her hand, Brandon at the window, her being terrified? Erica, the diner, Brandon wreaking his revenge, the cape and mask, the destruction of her eye, the camera looking through her bloodshot eyes? Brandon and his confrontations, able to move swiftly through distances, the experience with his aunt, confronting her, threatening her, Noah’s arrival, the attack, driving his car, Brandon and the car accident, Noah’s death? The family grief?

13. Kyle offering to take Brandon hunting, the past experience when camping, yet Brandon disappearing for vengeance? Kyle attempting to shoot Brandon? Kyle’s death? The sheriff, discovering the drawings, coming to visit Tori, her denial?

14. Tori, discovering the drawings, her decision, phoning the police, Brandon and his threats, creating mayhem? The sheriff and his assistant arriving, their grim deaths?

15. Brandon, Tori kind, trying to reassure him, their going up into the sky, his letting her fall?

16. The apocalyptic consequences and the menace to the earth – with more Brandons planted throughout the world?

GODZILLA, KING OF THE MONSTERS

US, 2019, 132 minutes, Colour.
Kyle Chandler, Vera Farmiga, Millie Bobby Brown, Ken Watanabe, Ziyi Zhang, Bradley Whitford, Sally Hawkins, Charles Dance, Thomas Middleditch, Asia Hinds, O' Shea Jackson Jr, David Strathairn.
Directed by Michael Dougherty.

Well, over the decades, we have become very used to Godzilla. In the olden days he came from Japan, then he appeared in Japanese- American coproductions, and, since the 1990s, he has been appearing in American blockbusters like this one – and already, a sequel has been announced, ominous for large battles, Godzilla versus Kong.

This adventure is definitely for the fans, others may find the experience too overwhelming – and, especially, too, too loud.

After the destruction of San Francisco where expert scientist, Dr Emma Russell (Vera Farmiga) lost her son but is now very protective of her daughter, Madison (Millie Bobby Brown), and alienated from her expert husband Mark (Kyle Chandler), has been working on a machine to control giant monsters.

And there are giant monsters around (or rather, underground) eager to emerge, Godzilla included.

The preoccupation is not on global warming but, rather, the havoc wrought on the planet by overdevelopment and a theory that humanity has almost destroyed itself but the re-awakening of the monsters and their being let loose will actually have the aftermath of regeneration of the earth and its productivity. Plenty of questions there!

Emma is a proponent of this theory. Mark, who has been called in to combat the monsters, thinks otherwise. Then, there is a large squad of scientists and technicians who travel around, try to control the monsters, and, of course, the American military is hostile to them and wants them destroyed. And that, more or less is what we see.

Perhaps it is more rather than less. Quite a number of the creatures come out from underground locations which had been supervised by a company called Monarch. As the monsters emerge, the humans are in conflict. And, to say the least, the monsters themselves are in conflict. There is the supervised emergence of Moth rather in China. There is also the emergence of the monster, Rodan. But, certainly fixing our attention is the extraordinary three headed monster, King Ghidorah.

As even more monsters emerge, they begin to fight with each other, the three headed monster definitely having too much advantage over the others! The battle sequences between the monsters go on and on, flailing, vicious attacks, destructive intent. And there were roars! Roars is something of an understatement given the technical means of amplifying and over-amplifying volume. Sitting in the cinema seat, one can’t avoid it – except by escaping.

And this is the setting for the monster saviour, Godzilla, to resurrect, to appear, to combat the other monsters, not without some self-sacrifice on the part of the humans, alienated husband and wife combining to find solutions as well as to save their daughter.

Quite a number of prominent actors in supporting roles, perhaps indulging their zest for Godzilla stories.

One for Godzilla fans, not one for Godzilla non-fans who would prefer an alternate, rather more restful, cinema outing.

1. The long tradition of the Godzilla films? The Japanese origins, the story of Godzilla, Godzilla and destruction, film showing Godzilla and alliances with humans? Godzilla sympathetic in this film – and the preparation for yet another film, with King Kong?

2. The explanations of the monsters, their variety, Monarch and their surveillance? The various locations around the world? Scientific observations? Technology to control the monsters? Seeing the technology in action?

3. The special effects, the variety of monsters, Moth rather, the three headed monster, spiders and variations on other species? Their emergence, size, interactions with humans, fights amongst themselves – the editing of the many fights, the long fights, the volume of sound that they emitted? The visualising of their energies, from within?

4. The human story, the focus on the destruction of San Francisco, the death of the son, Emma and Madison, working on the machines, their absent father, the aftermath of the death, his continued explorations and experiments? Alienation?

5. The intrusion of Jonah, his command, intentions, working with Emma, the machine, the control of the monsters?

6. Emma, her theories, human destruction of the earth, the monsters and there being able to renew the earth? Bypassing of issues of climate change? More apocalyptic experiences for eventual renewal?

7. The American military, the meetings, the officials, equipment, the destruction of the monsters?

8. The various scientists, their experience, finding Kyle, bringing him back, his desire to see his daughter, confrontations with Emma, his skills, knowledge, technology?

9. Seeming disasters, the emergence of the range of monsters, emerging from under the earth, conflicts? Trying to locate Godzilla?

10. The conflict between Emma and Kyle? Their conversations, Madison shown in siding with her mother?

11. The main action and the conflicts, the dangers, the human response? The professor, the international group on staff, their varied stances, the professor sacrificing himself? Encouraging Godzilla?

12. Madison, conflict between mother and father, her escaping back home, the machine? The threats? Her parents finding her, uniting?

13. Godzilla, confrontation of the of the monsters, destruction?

14. The information about the earth being renewed in the aftermath of the monsters? The role of Godzilla – and for the future?