PICK OF THE LITTER

US, 2018, 81 minutes, Colour.
Directed by Don Hardy Jr, Dana Nachman.

Yes, they have used the pun for promotion, Dogumentary!

This documentary lives up to its title which explains fairly exactly what it is about. Screenings of the film around Australia have been sponsored by organisations for Guide Dogs for the Blind.

This is a film which most dog-lovers probably could not resist. Those who are not dog-lovers will appreciate how significant it is for the selected dogs to be nurtured and trained so that they will be able to enhance the lives of those who cannot see or who cannot see well. The dogs will enable them to rely less on canes and more on the instincts and behaviour of the dogs and to save them from accidents and danger.

The structure of the film is very straightforward. It focuses on five puppies, their being born, helped by the experts in their initial moments, nurtured by their mother, ready to go into a program that will lead some of them (not all of them – and that provides a bit of dramatic tension throughout the film as to which of the five will succeed in being guide dogs or will have on their profile the rather whitewashing term “career-changed�) to guiding the blind.

So, the dogs are named, three males, two females. Much is made of the energy in two of the males, Phil and Patriot. As a device to focus the attention of the audience, following the two dogs, maybe liking one better than the other, hoping for one to succeed over the other (or, perhaps even-handedly, hoping that both will succeed). And there are two female dogs also in training.

We meet quite a number of adults along the way, the initial trainers who inculcate the basics for the dogs, accompanying them with great attention and care. One or other of the dogs proves to be too playful, not having that innate sense of responsibility that will lead them to be a guide.

And then the dogs are moved into more careful training, the types of experience that will help them with their carers, alert them to oncoming vehicles, enable them to turn right or left at the correct time and place…

In the meantime, the film also focuses on some of the adults who have been waiting for a guide dog for some time and will be eligible once the pick or picks of the litter are trained.

There is of course some tension, in the final tests, not every dog measuring up – and one or other of the dogs having to walk the exam again.

Needless to say, there are some delights for the audience having the opportunity to watch the incapacitated adults to meet their dogs, scenes showing how they get used to the dogs, walking with them, and the exhilaration of the blind to find opportunities for having a freer, more open life.

Certainly a case of worthy documentary-making.

GERALD’S GAME

US, 2017, 103 minutes, Colour.
Carla Gugino, Bruce Greenwood, Henry Thomas, Chiara Aurelia, Carel Struycken, Kate Siegel.
Directed by Mike Flanagan.

Stephen King is the author of the book, Gerald’s Game. While it has elements of horror, it is also a story about a marriage, its breakdown, sexual relationships, the touches of sadomasochism.

It is also a tour de force performance by Carla Gugino, the wife who travels with her husband, Gerald (Bruce Greenwood) to a cottage out in the country to try to make something of their marriage – and they are seen packing handcuffs as they leave.

Significant for the horror is that they are stopped on the road by a dog, feeding on roadkill, who later reappears and is fed choice meat by the wife. She leaves the door unlocked, goes into join her husband who handcuffs her to the bed. As they begin the foreplay, she reacts badly. Gerald has a heart seizure, collapses and falls to the floor.

So, a scenario where the wife is handcuffed to the bed, her husband dead and the dog coming in and feeding on the body, no expected contacts or visitors, the phone far away.

The way that this situation is handled is by the wife withdrawing into her inner self and her alter ego, a strong version of herself, appearing and giving her advice. Her husband’s spirit also appears, his alter ego, hostile and tormenting her. So, a complex psychological drama.

There are also flashbacks to explain the wife’s behaviour and attitude, the abuse by her father in the past.

Then there are also the horror elements, the presence of the dog and her husband’s body, her injuries to her hand as she breaks free from the cuffs.

There is also the mysterious appearance, real or ghostly, of a vagrant man who has a bag of jewels, including her wedding ring.

This all comes to a head when the wife has recovered, insurance covering her experience, a court case involving the vagrant man.

Not the usual Stephen King material – although it has some relationship with the superior Dolores Claiborne.

1. A Stephen King story? The popularity of Stephen King, novels, stories, films, television series?

2. This film is a sex and relationship story?

3. The film as a horror story, the horror elements?

4. Jessie and Gerald, their packing, the handcuffs, travelling the countryside, the dog in the middle of the road, eating roadkill, the confrontation, the dog moving away? Jessie, the special meat from the fridge, offering it to the dog, the dog’s approach? Gerald and his criticism?

5. In the house, isolated, preparing for the sexual encounter, Jessie handcuffed? Jessie frigid, the tensions, the memories of her past? Gerald as aggressive? Jessie wanting to stop?

6. Gerald, his heart attack, collapse, death, falling to the floor? Jessie handcuffed? The potential horror?

7. Gerald’s ghost, presence, taunting his wife, talking and mocking? Yet learning about her past and wanting to know it?

8. Jessie and her alter ego, Jessie’s journey into her mind, the alter ego strong, the advice, encouraging, getting the water, making the straw, eventually the bleeding and getting her hand through the cuffs? The alter ego and the interaction with Gerald’s ghost?

9. The role of the dog, the door open, entering, savaging Gerald’s body, threatening? The blood?

10. The passing of time, the night, the dawn, Jessie cutting herself, getting the wrist free? Trying for the phone, her escape, the key, losing her ring?

11. The presence of the stranger, appearance, the bag of jewels, the blood footprint? The later information and explanation, the facts, the stranger in court, Jessie confronting him?

12. Her driving, Gerald and the ghost farewelling, her collapse, rescue?

13. Her recovery, writing the letter, to her younger self? The insurance covering the situation?

14. The theme of facing one’s life in death? The flashbacks to her girlhood, her relationship with her father, with her mother and the other children? The episode of the eclipse, the father and his plausible talk, flattering his daughter, his sexual experience? Later in the room, the extensive discussion, the father completely rationalising what he had done, justifying himself, transferring the responsibility to his daughter?

15. The ending of the film, the reunion between the two selves, reconciliation?

16. Besides the sex games and the horror, a powerful presentation of a father’s abuse of his daughter at his self-justification?

DEAD IN A WEEK: OR YOUR MONEY BACK

UK, 2018, 90 minutes, Colour.
Tom Wilkinson, Aneurin Barnard, Christopher Eccleston, Freya Mavor, Marion Bailey, Gethin Anthony, Nigel Lindsay.
Directed by Tom Edmunds.

With a title like this, it is obvious that there will be a sardonic tone to both drama and comedy.

Aneurin Barnard plays a suicidal young man, a disappointed author, prone to failure in his attempts to kill himself. Finding some advertising, he makes contact with a professional hitman and they make a contract. It is something of a Murphy’s Law story, that whatever could go wrong, does go wrong – including an attempt on the young man but the killing of a publisher with whom he is having a drink.

He makes friends with the young woman who works with the publisher, telling her the story, taking refuge in her country house – but the hitman following through.

What makes the film even more sardonic is that Tom Wilkinson plays a hitman, proud of his profession, trying to fulfil his quota, supported by his wife at home who is passionate about quilt-making and local competitions – and who, it is later revealed, is highly supportive of her husband and his work, ready to participate if she has to defend him!

There is also the complication that the hitman works for an agency, a kind of thugs incorporated, presided over by Christopher Eccleston who makes demands on the hitman and then puts a contract out on him.

While there is action, there are certainly a lot of conversation in the film, between the young man and the girl and his pessimism and her support, between the hitman and his wife, between the boss and his associates, building up to a final confrontation, the two men a table with guns under the table aimed at each other.

Needless to say, are sardonically happy ending.

1. The title? The tone? Humour? Black humour? The dialogue? And the criminal activity being presented in the style of ordinary life and work?

2. The London settings, homes, pubs, offices? The countryside? The musical score?

3. William, depressed, the attempts to kill himself, the brochure, contacting Leslie, the meeting, the contract, the parody of everything being businesslike? The choice of death? Wanting to save a child in front of the truck? The decision to shoot? Leslie and the various attempts?

4. William, the story of his parents being crushed by the piano? His writing, sketches, wanting to publish? Yet determined to kill himself?

5. Leslie, his relationship with his wife, her devotion, the sewing competition at her cushion, Leslie at home, meals and conversation, his preoccupation about his work? The later irony that Penny knew all about it, encouraged him, even had a knife?

6. William and the publisher, the meeting, the possibilities, Leslie shooting the publisher? William blaming himself, Leslie discovering that there was a contract on the publisher?

7. William and Ellie, the slits on her wrists, her listening sympathetically, encouraging William with his writing and publishing? The effect of the death of the publisher? The conversations, the explanations, going out together, the changing his mind? Going to the countryside? His falling in love? The decision to cancel the contract – and the irony of Leslie being in the house, the shooting, the chase?

8. Harvey, the organisation of hitmen, summoning Leslie, the offer of the clock, firing him? Leslie upset, one for killing for his quota? Harvey and the ironic conversation about killing is and his business style? Putting a contract on Leslie?

9. Penny, her cushion, going off to the fair, the competition, the ladies, the announcements – and the audience kept in suspense about Penny winning?

10. Ivan, is coming to kill Leslie, getting into the house, Leslie leaving, the ransacking? Penny and her phone call in the middle of Leslie is trying to shoot William?

11. William tracking down Ellie and William, the confrontation with the gun, the phone calls, the arguments, Leslie attacked by Ivan, Ivan threatening to shoot William, the two guns, Ellie urging the change of guns to make the suicide and the shooting plausible? Ivan about to shoot, Leslie recovering, bashing Ivan?

12. Leslie still intent to shoot William, the idea of a second contract, retrospective?

13. Leslie at home, Harvey’s visit, the conversation, Penny being hospitable, liking the clock? Leslie and Harvey with the guns under the table, the argument, Penny saying that they were going to take a trip around the world? Harvey reluctant and going? In the fact that Penny had a knife at the ready to use?

14. William and Ellie, his writing a new book about assassins?

15. A happy ending after all the ironies?

CITY OF TINY LIGHTS

UK, 2016, 101 minutes, Colour.
Riz Ahmed, Billie Piper, James Floyd, Cush Jumbo, Roshan Seth, Alexander Siddiq, Hannah Rae, Reiss Kershi.
Directed by Pete Travis.

To say simply that City of Tiny Lights is a private eye story is to underestimate the importance of the background to the plot.

The setting is London, especially ethnic areas in East London. The private detective at the centre of the film, is played effectively by Riz Ahmed, a Londoner with Pakistani background. The screenplay fills out a lot of the background of his family, especially of his father, played by Roshan Seth, who had fled from Uganda in the 1970s and settled in London.

While the private detective is doing his work, there are many flashbacks to his life as a teenager, his friendship with the young girl, Shelley, her relationship with a friend, Stuart, and the various tangles, especially with Stuart’s death. The other friend in these flashbacks is a young man, Lovely.

This is all relevant for the current investigation, the death of a young prostitute in a hotel and her close friend asking Tommy to investigate the case. This eventually leads back to Lovely, now a successful businessman involved in building developments, the murdered man being his business partner. Melody, who has a teenage daughter, now works in a restaurant in London.

As the investigation continues, the audience begins to understand the complications of the past and Stuart’s death and its consequences. This leads to the solving of the case and the involvement of Lovely.

There are further complications with Muslim groups in London, the role of the leader, suspicions of terrorism – which, in this case, are not justified.

So, the private detective story, but a story of 21st-century London and the complexities of its ethnic groups.

1. The title, the opening overviews of London, the action in East London, the atmosphere of groups of migrants from Pakistan, the Middle East? Muslim area?

2. Homes, streets, private detective office, hotels, business developments, the house of the Imam? Restaurants?

3. The action in the present, the range of flashbacks, the central characters and the memories of the past? Tommy, the attraction to Shelley? Stuart and his attention? Her being pregnant? Stuart upset, his death? Shelley pregnant? The influence of Lovely and his telling Stuart? Shelley and her pregnancy, her daughter, Tommy’s visit to Stuart’s grave, Shelley with her daughter? The daughter coming to Tommy’s office to ask for explanations about her father?

4. Tommy, at home, his father and the memories of service in Uganda, fleeing Uganda to London, the photos of his wife? His obsession with cricket, the cricket metaphors? At home, support of his son? His willingness to help Melody, taking her in? At the end, the gun, the shooting?

5. Tommy, his work, his confiding to the audience about secrets, hiding them, unearthing them? His office? The visit to Melody? The disappearance of Natasha? The information, the list of hotels, his visits and interrogations? Finding the room, the dead body, getting the passkey, slipping out, taking the phone, making the phone call, considering this from the police, the contact with Lovely? The identity of the dead man, in business, with prostitutes, lovely considering him the business?

6. Tommy, the locals, the woman in the cafe, wanting him to care for her son, his using the sun for technology, information? The boy’s injuries in hospital, his mother blaming Tommy?

7. The police and the contacts? The spy services, suspicion of Muslims and terrorists, warning Tommy off?

8. The contact with Melody, the threats to her, taking her to his father?

9. Shelley and her return, the work, the meetings, the night with her, memories of the past? Her daughter?

10. The Muslim area, the young men, seeming fanatical, the interview with the Imam, his sternum stances, under suspicion, arrested? The issue of drugs? Getting them off the streets? Muslim beliefs and morality?

11. Meeting up with Lovely, Lovely at home, his wife? Memories of the past, friendships? His business, the enterprise, going to the site? The issue of drugs on the street? Discovery of the truth, his presence of the hotel, his partner’s death, tracking down Natasha and her death, threats to Melody?

12. The streets, the riots, the chases, brutality?

13. The buildup to the climax, Tommy and the case, at home, with Lovely, his father, the shooting?

14. The final meal, resolution, Melody, the young man, Shelley arriving?

FIRST THEY KILLED MY FATHER

Cambodia/USA, 2017, 136 minutes, Colour.
Sareum Srey Moch.
Directed by Angelina Jolie.

Over the decades Angelina Jolie has been noted for her compassionate outreach. She also made a film in the Balkans, In the Land of Blood and Honey, followed by the story of Olympic athlete Louis Zamperini, a plane crash and his 45 days drifting in the Pacific before being captured by the Japanese.

This time she has moved to Cambodia and collaborated with Loung Ung, who wrote her memoir of being a child in the 1970s, the years of the American bombing of Cambodia followed by the taking over of the country by the Khmer Rouge. She was separated from her parents, wandered the killing fields, working, surviving with other children, involved in the battle between the Khmer Rouge and those who rebelled against them, eventually being reunited with her mother and some of the family.

In some ways, this film serves as a documentary about changes in Cambodia, the middle-class affluent families and the Khmer Rouge taking over, sending them into exile, into the fields to work, many executions. The film shows the intensity of the younger members of the Khmer Rouge, their brainwashed approach to ordinary citizens, harshness and brutality.

Angelina Jolie also brings great humanity, female sensibility, to the story of the young girl, to the stories of the other women who suffered during these years.

The main film for comparisons or as a companion film is Roland Joffe’s 1984, The Killing Fields.

1. The film based on the personal memoir by Loung Ung? Her collaboration on the screenplay with Angelina Jolie? A heartfelt telling of the story?

2. The Cambodian settings? The late 1960s and early 1970s? Richard Nixon and his decision to bomb Cambodia, yet the fiction that it was not being bombed, the neutral country? The visuals of the bombings and the devastation? The growing propaganda against the Americans?

3. Life in Phnom Penh, prosperity, the middle-class family and their lifestyle? The effect of the bombings?

4. The rise of the Khmer Rouge, against the Americans, invading the cities, arrests, destruction, pillaging, deaths? The portrait of the Khmer Rouge throughout the whole film, the soldiers, the young women, the youth movements, the uniforms, the violence, the socialist attitudes, toppling of privilege, everybody forced to work? The number of deaths, the cruelty? The final statistics about deaths?

5. The portrait of the family, the home, the join in the family, the lifestyle? The father and his work? The mother and the children? The children in their age?

6. The suddenness of the attack, getting possessions, fleeing, walking, the growing masses of people, the soldiers, the harshness, registrations, condemnations, executions?

7. The children wandering, the focus on Loung, the close-ups of her face, her anxiety, her age? The children with their mother? The trek? The separations, the deceit in terms of work for the government, the work in the fields?

8. The details of the harsh life, clothes, work, the military and the threats? The mother sending the girls away, their story about being orphans? They’re being taken in, the supervision and the harshness? The moment with a sympathetic soldier – and Loung seeing him being tortured at the end?

9. The regime, the indoctrination, the patriotic songs, the loyalties?

10. The changes, the children fleeing, the soldiers, caught in the crossfire between rebels and the Khmer Rouge? Deaths?

11. The defeat of the Khmer Rouge, the children saved, the devastation, the return home, reunited with mother and siblings?

12. Angelina Jolie’s sensitivity to the children, the family, the mother, relationships, suffering?

13. Angelina Jolie and the photography, the work in the fields, the fields of the seasons, the aerial shots, the crowds of people?

14. The audience drawn back into the experience of Cambodia in the 1970s?

CALIBRE

UK, 2018, 101 minutes, Colour.
Jack Lowdon, Martin Mc Cann, Tony Curran, Ian Pirie.
Directed by Matthew Palmer.

This film relies on two meanings of the word, calibre. First, and most obviously, it refers to guns and guns play a significant role in this drama. It can also mean quality, high calibre, moral attitudes and stances that human beings display. The drama here illustrates different stages of moral calibre.

At first, the story is straightforward, two friends for most of their lives go on a hunting holiday in the Scots Highlands. They played by Jack Lowdon and Martin Mc Cann, Vaughan and Marcus. When they stay in a small town, they initially feel hostility but, gradually, they are accepted, especially by the leader, Tony Curran. And they encountered two girls, Marcus going off for the night, Vaughan excusing himself because he is engaged and is expecting a child.

What goes wrong is Vaughan in the hunting expedition, more nervous, dared to shoot, the target deer moving and his shooting a young boy. And here begins the moral challenge. Stunned, Vaughan eventually wants to report the incident to the authorities. Marcus, on the other hand, successful in business, with his reputation, not only wants to cover up but actually shoots the boy’s father and the two bury the body.

There is drama when they return to the town, are invited to dinner, then the details of who the victims are and are invited to join in the search for the missing father and son. Eventually, when sniffer dogs find the bodies, they run.

They are taken by the men of the town, brutalised, although the leader warns them and also suggests the reputation of the town should anything happen to the men. But, what happens, is one of those dilemmas where Marcus is held and Vaughan is urged to shoot him. And so the question is: what is Vaughan’s moral calibre?

Effective in its way, audiences identifying with some emotion in the final dilemma and Vaughan’s decision.

1. A British thriller? Serious themes?

2. Scot city, the Scots countryside, the Highlands? The towns, the forests? The musical score?

3. The title, the calibre of guns? Human moral calibre?

4. Vaughan, his fiancee, her pregnancy, his hopes? The friendship with Marcus? Many years? His success in business? The background of hunting? The plan to travel, hunting the deer?

5. The countryside, the friendship and their talk? Arriving in the town, accommodation, the pub, the men in the pub, talk? Meeting Logan, his friendship? The surliness of some of the others? The two girls, the flirting? Marcus going off with the girl in the night? Vaughan and Iona, talking, his going back to the hotel?

6. Going to the hunt, the deer in the sights, Marcus coaching Vaughan, the shot, the shock of the death of the boy? Vaughan his reaction, shock? Marcus, the reaction, seeing the father, shooting him?

7. Issues of moral calibre, the reaction, Marcus fearing being caught, the drugs, his job, reputation? Vaughan wanting the truth to be told? Hiding the bodies? Going back, seemingly normal, the dinner, the venison, born being sick? Logan and his friendship?

8. The return, burying the bodies, the return? The boy watching from the window?

9. The appeal for the search, the group going out, the sniffer dog, finding the bodies, digging them up? Vaughan and Marcus running, the car, breakdown, their being caught?

10. Marcus, being tied up, the previous accusations about the cocaine, with the girl? Garage, the attempts to fix the car?

11. Vaughan, the interrogation, the bashing, his trying to tell the truth, his apology? The vigil Attitude of the men? Logan, administering justice, the risks to the reputation of the town? His calming the men?

12. The solution, that Vaughan should shoot Marcus? His fears, regrets, the taunts, the gun held on him? His suddenly shooting Marcus? His being let go?

13. His return home, his fiancee, the birth of the baby, getting up during the night?

14. The effect on him, his conscience, his life?

THE BEST OF MEN

UK, 2012, 90 minutes, Colour.
Eddie Marsan, George Mackay, Robert Brydon, Niamh Cusack, Richard Mc Cabe, Nicholas Jones.
Directed by Tim Whitby.

Here is a film that could be recommended for most audiences. The setting is 1944 and the year towards the end of World War II. It is set in an institution, not well-funded, for those who have suffered spinal injuries. Authorities consider that they will not recover.

Into this setting comes a German refugee, Jewish background, Dr Ludwig Gutmann. He has had qualifications in spinal surgery in Germany and comes into the Institute with a very Germanic approach, very definite, often peremptory. He wants broader treatment of the soldiers, more compassionate, less reliance on morphine, he prefers a belief that there can be improvement in quality of life even if not reversal of spinal injury.

He is played by Eddie Marson in one of his best roles. He is assisted by the severe nurse, Niamh Cusack, who resents his presence and his methods – but, slowly and ultimately, comes to support him, especially when she sees the results. Amongst the patients are George Mackay and Robert Brydon is a sardonic Welshman. There is also a superior doctor, looking down on the patients, certainly hostile to Dr Gutmann, played by Richard Mc Cabe.

The film shows the slower reactions of the patients, the response to the change of attitudes, some dying, some refusing hope – but eventually moved out of their comfort zones, moving their limbs, the doctor finding ways of keeping them active, including sports.

Despite opposition and lack of means, Dr Gutmann improves the lives of the patients, especially through sport. Some audiences may know that this led to the para-Olympics. For many audiences this is a discovery, the games and competitiveness, growing support of the public, National games, international games and finally to the Olympics.

A fine 90 minutes of humanitarian hope.

1. The title? An inspirational film?

2. The story of a Ludwig Guttmann, his background in Germany, qualifications, in England, his career? Skills in spinal medicine? His foresight, games and activities? His knighthood?

3. UK, 1944-1945, the countryside, the hospital, interiors, the wards, surgery, government offices? The musical score?

4. The grounds of the hospital, sports and performance?

5. Will, his age, with the girl on the hill, called up, his injuries, spinal effect, wanting to die, his howling in the Ward, the treatment?

6. The men in the Ward, Wynne Bowen? The Welsh background? Complaining? The interchanges?

7. The nursing staff, nurse Rogers, routines, strict, her new assistant? The resentment towards Dr Guttman? Mr Callan, surgery, expertise, instructing the recruits, his superior and snobbish attitudes?

8. Eddie Marson, his presence, appearance, manner? Bringing Dr Guttman to life? The German background, the visit to his wife and children, the Jewish background and family in prison? His being in England, Germanic and style, a man of vision, his past qualifications?

9. HIs manner, brusque, decisive, eliminating morphine, medical routines, the treatment of bedsores, getting the patients to move? The reaction of the men? The reaction of the nurses, of Mr Callan?

10. The general, his support, the discussions about supplies and requests? Callan and his attitude towards spinal sufferers, not holding any hope?

11. The response to movement, exercise, slow processes? The psychology of the patients, listening to their stories, nurse Rogers and her listening?

12. The critique of Dr Guttman, their comeuppance, his success, getting support, the officer assigned for exercises, his initial hostility?

13. Exercise, the introduction of sports, the gradual development, playing indoors, the variety of sports, the teams, moving outdoors, getting the equipment, participation?

14. Callan, no hope, his speeches against the sports, outvoted, humiliation?

15. Will, the gradual development, his parents and his father’s hesitation, seeing him as a failure, the decision for him to go into care? His discussions with them, the sports, Dr Guttman forcing him to make a decision?

16. Wynne, the visit of his wife, upset, contemplating the divorce? Going for the weekend, and Beaulieu and on his arrival back?

17. Some deaths in the Ward, the pace of pathos of death? Survival?

18. Nurse Rogers, her change of heart, standing up a Dr Guttman?

19. The games, the development, wills father and his visit and support? Wynne arriving for the Welsh team?

20. The games, the spread, institutions, in the UK, National – leading to the para Olympics?

FALLEN

UK/Hungary, 2017, 90 minutes, Colour.
Addison Timlin, Jeremy Irvine, Harrison Gilbertson, Joely Richardson, Hermione Corfield, Lola Kirke, Daisy Head, Juliet Aubrey, Norma Kuhling, Sianoa Smit-McPhee?.
Directed by Scott Hicks.

It is a bit of a surprise to find that the director of this supernatural fantasy is Scott Hicks (Shine, Snow Falling on Cedars, Hearts in Atlantis).

In recent decades, there have been many films about fallen angels, like the Prophecy series, as well as the 1990s drama with Denzel Washington. It is also called Fallen.

An explanation is given about the fall – not exactly the biblical story but an invention based on it. There are the rebellious angels and there are some angels who fall to earth because they did not take sides. And there is one angel who made an option because of love.

The setting is an institution where a young woman is sent after a court appearance. It will emerge that she has memories of the past, has been reliving her life and needs to be saved. There are inmates at the school who mock her, some who support her. And there is the attractive presence of Jeremy Irvine – whom she remembers in an episode from the 19th century. There is also a mysterious teacher who special subject seems to be the fall. She is played by Joely Richardson.

The film has a comparatively brief running time, sets up the characters in the institution, indicates the evil and the good angels, the evil one played by Harrison Gilbertson. They eventually sprout wings, are involved in deadly conflict, both hoping to save the heroine.

The material for a Young Adults novel and film – and for younger rather than older.

1. The title? The popularity of the novel? The mythology about angels, the rebellion against God, the rebellious Angels, the undecided Angels who fell, the angel who fell for the sake of Love? The connections with biblical stories? Melodramatic enhancing of these stories, fictions?

2. Lucinda’s story, her background, her powers, visions and shadows, her responsibility for the death of Trevor? In court, sentenced to the establishment? Her age, experience, personality? Bewilderment, resentment? The interview at her arrival, the range of women, helping, Pen and her friendship? Molly and her sinister hostility?

3. Her seeing Cam being returned? His rebellious attitudes? Her encounters with him, in class, fencing, his presence, the attraction? Her seeing Daniel, in the library, his ignoring her, in class? The fencing class and her powerful experiences, attacking him? The gradual revelation of the truth, her memories of the 19th century, Todd and his technological skills, the picture?

4. Life at the establishment, the routines, the effect on Lucinda?

5. Miss Sophia, her specialty, the library, the lessons, the stories of the angels? Her interventions? With Daniel – her pleading, her disappearing?

6. The buildup to a climax, Daniel rescuing Lucinda? The clash between Daniel and Cam? The battle between good and evil? Lucinda and her choice, the kiss?

7. The special visual effects for the fights between the two angels?

8. The explanations of Daniel’s history, Lucinda’s past and encounters with him? The future?

WOMAN WALKS AHEAD

US, 2017, 100 minutes, Colour.
Jessica Chastain, Michael Greyeyes, Sam Rockwell, Chaske Spencer, Ciaran Hinds, Bill Camp.
Directed by Susanna White.

This film tells an interesting story, the story of the 19th-century American artist, Catherine Weldon, who had painted a number of celebrities, including politicians.

Commentators note that the film of differs from the truth about Catherine Weldon herself, her affairs, leaving her husband. Here she is presented as a widow.

However, she decides that she wants to paint Native Americans in their context, specifically Sitting Bull, with memories of Custer and his stand. She receives a lot of opposition from the military, embodied in Sam Rockwell’s hostile officer, and from the local Indian agent, Ciaran Hinds, who has married a local woman who serves as his interpreter.

Despite so much opposition, she eventually meets Sitting Bull, working as a farmer (Michael Greyeyes), wins his confidence, painted his portrait, becomes involved in politics, especially with an upcoming treaty with the Indians which will result in the limitations of their land. And she is treated violently by the locals

Catherine Weldon is played by Jessica Chastain as a strong-minded woman with a mission.

1. Based on a true story? (But the sanitising of the character of Catherine Weldon?)

2. The 1890s, Native Americans, the end of the wars, the proposal of treaties, the oppression of the Native Americans?

3. The New York opening? The train travel across the United States? The West? The railway station, the open plains, the town, the Indian settlement, the Native Americans working gardens, potatoes? The hut? Sitting Bull’s cabin? The Indian agent, the visiting general, accommodation? The meeting for the boat? The musical score?

4. Seeing the events from the point of view of Native Americans, the history, bond with the land, traditions, nature, the Buffalo, the fights, the sense of the supernatural? Operation? The Ghost Dances?

5. Seeing the events from the point of view of white Americans, Catherine Weldon, wanting to paint, the experience of the landscapes, meeting the Native Americans, the encounters with Sitting Bull? Seeing the events from the point of view of the military, memories of the fights and massacres, regrets yet control? The Indian agent and his Native American wife? Giving up the old ways and language?

6. Catherine Weldon, widow, money, the decision to paint, her reputation, travelling to the west, the encounter with Groves and his negative approach? The agent and is intending to have her arrested? The rumours that she was a spy? Male hostility on the train? The encounter with Sitting Bull’s nephew, meeting the chief and his potatoes, the offer of $1000, his agreement, the cabin and accommodation, going to his special cabin, her unwillingness to ride the horse and her father’s treatment of her when she was eight, wanting to paint outside, to wear his regalia? The sittings and Groves’ spying?

7. Catherine learning more about the Native Americans, the proposal of the treaty, the injustice of the taking of the land? Her writing to politicians? Her urging Sitting Bull? Her going to the town, her being bashed? Her visit to the dinner and the men seeing her injuries?

8. The bond with Sitting Bull, rumours about a relationship? Language, translations? The encounters with Groves and the animosity?

9. Sitting Bull and his gathering the tribes, the discussions about the treaty, everybody coming to the town, the bribed speeches, the general presiding, his respect for Sitting Bull? The chief’s arrival, his speech? Hostility, the threats of arrest, the troops and the shooting him?

10. Catherine, her grief? The US government and the passing of the treaty legislation? The consequences?

11. The film as a eulogy for the Native Americans?

RAISE THE RED LANTERN

China, 1991, 125 minutes, Colour.
Gong Li.
Directed by Zhang Yimou.

During the 1980s, Zhang Yimou was a significant cinematographer. He worked on such films as Yellow Earth, a film of great visual beauty. Visual beauty was to the characteristic of the director’s films for the next three decades. He also designed the opening ceremony for the Beijing Olympic Games in 2008.

During the 1990s he produced quite a number of films, sometimes going back into Chinese history, as with this film about the 1920s, sometimes looking at contemporary issues. He won many awards, his films screened in various festivals, ecumenical and Catholic organisations also making awards to his films. His films at the end of the century, Not One Less and The Road Home are fine examples of small-scale humanitarian dramas.

During the 2000s he moved into elaborate martial arts and historical films, again with great beauty, films like The House of the Flying Daggers. After that, he experimented with a number of different subjects and styles. Quite moving is his film about the siege of Nanking, The Flowers of War,

The star of his films in the 1990s was Gong Li who emerged as an international star.

1. The film considered as a Chinese classic? The work of the director, his background as a cinematographer, his career as a director, the Beijing Olympics, Chinese dramas, history, martial arts and mythologies?

2. The beauty of the film, the colour photography, the seasons, compositions and movement, costumes and decor, architecture and structures? The musical score, the range of instruments and style?

3. 1920, social background, Chinese history, manners, mores? Customs and life? Wealth, power? The power of men? The roles of women, wives and concubines, servants?

4. The title, the lanterns and the sign of the husband visiting the wife? The other colours at the door of the other wives? The visuals of the lanterns, met of her?

5. The household situation, Chan and his power? His face never being seen? Presence? Women? His decisions, treatment of various will? Servants? The doctor and the discovery of the affair?

6. The initial focus on some, the close-up of the base, the audience contemplating her, her age, her father’s death, the house the visuals of the vistas?

7. The portraits – and the hierarchy of wives, the seniority of the oldest wife, having borne a son? The role of the second, the scheming? Her initial friendship towards Songlian? The third wife as an opera singer? Her ambitions?

8. Songlian, her wanting status, the pretence of pregnancy, the blood on the cloth, her period, the maid, reporting to the wife?

9. The role of the doctor, his affair with the wife, exposing the sham? The effect on Songlian?

10. The storage of the lanterns, the role of the maid, her ambitions, her lies? In the snow, no apology, sickness and death?

11. Songlian changing, the experience of her life in the house, the passing of the seasons, the relationship with her husband, turning 20, alone, her drinking, the doctor and the affair, her exposing the affair, watching the arrest, the wife taken for execution?

12. The taking of another wife, sombrely and alone – and the finale with her insane.