HELLBOY

US, 2019, 120 minutes, Colour.
David Harbour, Milla Jovovich, Ian Mc Shane, Sasha Lane, Daniel Dae Kim, Stephen Graham, Thomas Haden Church.
Directed by Neil Marshall.

Hellboy is based on popular comics by Mike Mignola. Mexican director, Guillermo Del Toro, made two very successful films a decade ago. However, he did not have the opportunity to make the third in his trilogy. This time the director is the British, Neil Marshall, who has made some horror films in the past and also contributed to Game of Thrones.

For those who know Hellboy, they can plunge right into the action. For those who don’t, there is, fortunately, a flashback to explain his origins (which also featured, of course, in the early film). The setting is 1943, a Nazi experiment on an island of Scotland, some British authorities infiltrating. The experiment produces a demonic baby, Hellboy. The British conquer the Nazis and one of the British experts, played by Ian Mc Shane, decides to adopt the strange baby (even with his horns). In the previous films Hellboy was played by Ron Perlman. He he is David Harbour, quite unrecognisable – but with his horns sheared off (and trimmed attentively by his father).

In fact, there are quite a number father-son difficulties throughout the film.

But, it needs to be said that there is a prologue to the film and it is set back in the sixth century, a prologue about King Arthur and Merlin, the confrontation with Queen Niewue, dressed literally in scarlet, a Blood Queen who traps them but they then turn the tables on her, impaling her and, almost immediately in the film, a very gory episode (with many, many gory episodes to follow) – and for those who want to know, she is cut into five pieces, including her talking head, concealed in boxes and buried throughout the countryside. She will make a later appearance, played by Mila Jovovich, put together again to wreak havoc on the world.

But, back to the present. There is an international flavour to the adventures, a brutal wrestling match in Tijuana with Hellboy present and grieving the demonic takeover of his co-agent. Then to Colorado, to the headquarters of the agency for colt research and a meeting with his father. The purpose of the meeting is a mission to London, to a mysterious organisation who want Hellboy’s assistance in hunting giants. Actually, he is the giant. But, there is no denying his superhuman, superdemonic powers.

In the meantime, there are other strange creatures roaming England, searching for the pieces of the Queen in order to put her together again. But, Hellboy encounters Alice, Sasha Lane, something of a young psychic as well is Ben Daimio, Daniel Dae Kim, Oriental but with the most polished English accent, a survivor from an attack by a leopard.

Ultimately of course, it is a confrontation between Hellboy and the Blood Queen, her aim is to destroy Hellboy’s father, to set free monsters who are seen roaming the streets of London seeking whom they can devour.

Needless to say, there is victory in an opportunity for a sequel – but this will depend on the box office success of this version (and, it is clear from bloggers on the IMDb that many are not pleased this time).

1. The original comics and graphic novels? The film versions? This version coming after the popularity of the superheroes?

2. The popularity of Hellboy, readership, film fans? The mixed reaction to this version?

3. The Tijuana settings, sleazy, the wrestling? The crowds? The transition to Colorado, the headquarters underground? The transition to London, the countryside locations? The end in Siberia? International locations?

4. The elements of the series with the comic, the absurd, over the top? Characters, Hellboy and his make up, the monsters? The situations, the occult and beyond this world?

5. The presuppositions about the culture, vampires, satanic presences, magicians?

6. The prologue, King Arthur, his forces, England’s past? The magicians? The Queen, her ambush, tables turned, her being impaled, chopped in pieces, separate boxes, scattered throughout the land? Arthur and Merlin, Excalibur?

7. The 21st century, the agencies, research, the occult? Communications? Tijuana, Hellboy and his presence, his father’s finding him, the agent, his being transformed, the vicious wrestling match? His death? Returning to himself? Hellboy’s reaction, the drinking, the agents coming to take him back?

8. Hellboy and the relationship to his father? The agents, missions? Osiris Club? The UK? Hellboy going, meeting the members of the club, British aristocracy, the mission against giants, Lady Elizabeth and her presence, blind?

9. Lady Elizabeth, the Nazi story, Hellboy and his origins, the Nazis, his father, the event, his birth? The defeat of the Nazis?

10. The hunt, the countryside, the masks, the absurdity, over the top? The attack on Hellboy, his strength, almost defeated?

11. The encounter with Alice, her powers? Home? In herself? Her helping? The bond with Hellboy?

12. Ben Daimio, his appearance, his impeccable accent, the leopard stories, the flashbacks, his survival, his wounds, the injections? His role, collaborating with Hellboy and Alice?

13. The range of monsters, their make-ups, the pursuing monster and his mission, his appearance, his voice and the Geordie accent, his role with the Blood Queen, promises, guarantees? His tracking down Hellboy, capturing him? The Queen and her reducing him in size, his disappearance?

14. The buildup to the confrontation, the taunts, Hellboy and the vicious fights, Alice and Ben Daimio helping, the torture, his growing his horns again, his power?

15. The Queen, put together, her powers, the streets of London, the monsters appearing, the massacre, the vision of the future, their defeat and their returning belowground?

16. The death of Hellboy’s father, Allice and her channelling him, his reappearance, his declarations to Hellboy, his pride?

TOP END WEDDING

Australia, 2019, 104 minutes, Colour.
Miranda Tapsell, Gwilym Lee, Kerry Fox, Huw Higginson, Ursula Yovich, Tracy Mann.
Directed by Wayne Blair.

Most audiences will enjoy travelling to the Northern Territory for this romantic comedy – and many will probably decide that they must go for a visit.

At the Melbourne premiere of Top End Wedding, director Wayne Blair welcomed the audience by stating that this was a Romcom, a black-white Romcom. It is the brainchild of the leading actress, Miranda Tapsell, who was one of the Sapphires in the film directed also by Wayne Blair. This time she is drawing on her own personal story about growing up in the Northern Territory and the story of her mother. She co-wrote the screenplay and was one of the producers. She is very small in stature – but, obviously, quite a powerhouse.

The opening is in Adelaide, audiences are able to identify with situations and characters, Miranda Tapsell playing Lauren, an associate in a law firm run by Hampton (and Lauren’s boyfriend, Ned, Gwilym Lee, refers to her as Cruella de Ville – and she does have a Cruella grey streak in her hair). She is played by Kerry Fox, a martinet of the highest order, who steals the scenes in which she appears. But, Lauren is made a partner, goes home happy, is proposed to by Ned, accepts, and decides that she wants her mother and father to walk her down the aisle, but in the Top End.

But, that will that be too short and sweet for a popular film? So, there are quite a lot of complications which lead to both further enjoyment as well as some touring around the top end, out to Kakadu, down to Katherine and a picnic in the Gorge, scenes of Darwin and then over to the Tiwi Islands for the wedding. Once again, plenty of opportunity for making future tourist decisions to visit!

There are all kinds of humorous characters throughout the film including Lauren’s father who turns up at the airport in his pyjamas to pick them up but he is grief stricken because his wife has walked out on him and he doesn’t know where she is – and his retreating frequently to hide in a closet playing “If you leave me now…�, the song that was playing when he first met his future wife. There are also Laurne’s three close friends, full of bounce and flirty, then commandeered by Hampton, along with the Dad, to prepare for the wedding. She has a big wall chart, timeline, jobs allotted…

Poor Ned, whom we first met floundering in a court case and then being advised to give up the law, travels with Lauren in order to find her mother, but there is tension and the calling off of the wedding. And, it means that Lauren flies to the Tiwi Islands and we enjoy the visit there, the range of people, her being reunited with her mother, meeting her grandparents, everything warm and wonderful – and the wedding back on.

So, Ned’s mother and brother arriving, Hampton persuaded to come as well, but Dad still in the closet weeping and Ned practically dragging him out to a motorboat to get them to the church on time (but even the congregation is impatient, including the aboriginal celebrant, when they are two hours late!).

Moments of sadness and stress, many more moments of excitement, and the whole experience of joy.

1. A black-white romantic comedy.

2. The title, the Northern Territory, Australian response? Overseas response?

3. The Adelaide settings, Australians identifying? Homes, court, officers? Ordinary life? The musical score?

4. The contrast with the Top End? The range of landscapes, Darwin, the city, Kakadu, towns, roads, Katherine, Katherine Gorge, the Tiwi islands? The range of songs?

5. Miranda Tapsell, her verve, writing, producing, acting? At work, her skills, the law? With Hampton? Dominated? Becoming partner? Lauren? The proposal?

6. The planning of the wedding, Lauren wanting it in the Northern Territory, wanting her parents to be present, walk her down the aisle? The glimpses of Ned’s family, his proper mother, brother, driving to the airport?

7. Arrival, Trevor in his pyjamas, looking sad, reaction to Ned? At home, the truth of his wife’s leaving, going into the cupboard, playing over and over “If you leave me now…�

8. Lauren, her girlfriends, memories of the past, the night out, dancing, drinking, flirting? The jobs in preparation for the wedding, Hampton and her allotting the tasks, their going to the shops?

9. Hampton, arriving, her flowchart, putting order into the preparations? With the girls? Sending Trevor out to get the decorations – and his going to the supermarket, on the bike?

10. The postponing of the wedding, the decision to search for Lauren’s mother, taking her father’s car? On the road, the contacts, on the bike? The French helicopter pilot and her mother? The jokes with his Australian accent? In Kakadu, Katherine, the aunty?

11. The journey, the car, breakdown, the bike, Katherine Gorge, Ned setting up the picnic?

12. Lauren’s decision to go to the Tiwi islands, meeting her mother, the audience having seen the flashbacks and her jilting the groom at the altar, the family pursuit? Her not going back to the islands? Trevor and his flashback to meeting his wife, work, the music? The mother going back home, meeting her parents, her mother and her mental limitations? The other women?

13. Lauren, reuniting, learning about her heritage, the talks with her grandparents?

14. The uncle, at the airport, in drag, the other men in drag?

15. Ned, going back to Darwin, the encounter with Hampton, the wedding called off, at the airport, the phone calls and the reaction of the people? Hampton urging him to go back, his urging her to stay?

16. Travelling to the islands, the parents, Ned delayed with Trevor, Trevor not wanting to go? His being persuaded? The motorboat? The congregation waiting, the priest and his comments, the ceremony, the celebration, everybody present?

17. Happy ending, feelgood, hopes?

THE TRAGEDY OF KING RICHARD II, National Theatre Live

UK, 2019, 105 minutes, Colour.
Simon Russell Beale, Leo Bill, Saskia Reeves,
Directed by Joe Hill- Gibbons.

This is the filmed version of a performance at the Alameida Theatre in London, under the sponsorship and distribution of National Theatre Live.

Shakespeare’s text has been bridged and Richard the second is final speech transferred to the opening of the performance forming a framework about Richard and his reflections on his fate.

There is a single set, a sealed room, no windows or doors. There is no real costuming, the performers wearing their rehearsal clothes. There are some buckets which are used – with water, blood, soil. And there is a gold paper crown.

Audiences not familiar with the play may find it difficult to deal with the range of characters since there are only eight in the cast, seven of them taking multiple roles. It is also difficult to gauge the time sequences, whether a long time for short periods.

Simon Russell Beale is Richard the second, the seeming failure in his rule of England, challenged by Henry, the son of John Gaunt, Bolingbroke, who plots against Richard and is exiled but returns, getting support from many nobles, eventually accepting the Crown before Richard dies. He is played by Leo Bill, rather younger and more Gaunt than might be expected, especially in comparison with Simon Russell Beale and his age and build.

The production notes for this performance have reference to bricks it, particular personalities involved in the bricks of debates, reflections of the mayhem in the British Parliament in the 21st-century – anticipated by factions, betrayals, accusations of treason, and literal executions rather than verbal condemnations and back-stabbing.

There are some famous passages, the praise of England, the sceptre do I’ll and other attributes, sitting on the ground speaking of Kings, and uneasy lies the head that wears a crown.

It is not the most exciting of Shakespeare’s plays, taking its place in his historical overview, something of a preview to the two parts of Henry IV, leading to Henry V and the three parts of Henry VI, the background to the War of the Roses in the series leading to the ascension of Henry VII and the Tudor dynasty.

MISSING LINK

US, 2019, 95 minutes, Colour.
Voices of: Hugh Jackman, Zach Galifianakis, Stephen Fry, Zoe Saldana, Emma Thompson, David Walliams, Matt Lucas, Timothy Olyphant, Amrita Acharia, Adam Godley.
Directed by Chris Butler.

Missing Link is something of a surprise. While screening for school holidays, it really is an animated film for an adult audience rather than a children’s audience. The reason for this is that it has a story and characters which are of more interest to adults than children.

In fact, looking at the voice cast, it obviously offers entertainment treats. It is mainly a British cast but has comedian, Zach Galifianakis as Mr Link, the Missing Link from the Northwest US, and Timothy Olyphant is a moustachioed villain. And, the star is Australian! Hugh Jackman with his very best of British accents. The rest of the cast is very British led by Stephen Fry and Emma Thompson.

This is the late 19th century-early 20th century. Britannia rules the waves, her explorers are everywhere, the atmosphere is colonial superiority. Jackman voices Sir Lionel Frost, first seen on Loch Ness, piping music underwater to rouse the monster – and he does. The monster is not too pleased and so all the evidence of the discovery is destroyed. This is completely unacceptable, as is Sir Lionel himself, to the aristocratic London club, presided over by the pompously of noxious Lord Piggott-Dunceby?, Stephen Fry going beyond Stephen Fry!

Actually, so Lionel receives a letter from Washington State from the Missing Link, a sweetly cultured giant creature whom Sir Lionel calls Mr Link (even though Mr Link has taken a shine to the name Susan).

This is a train, boat, horseback, Trak story across the US, across the Atlantic, across Europe, into Asia. Joining the expedition is the widow of one of Sir Lionel’s close associates, Adalina Fortnight (Zoe Saldana with one of those fiery Latin American temperaments and accents). Lord Piggott-Dunceby? will brook no success by Sir Lionel and sends the gunmen to follow him to the ends of the earth.

There is some humour in getting advice in the mountains of Tibet from an elderly lady who tells them how to get to Shangri-La? which is where the Yeti live. E get rather a surprise to see the Yeti, a lavish court, very civilised but isolationist, ruled over by a haughty elder (Emma Thompson).

So far, so good but also so difficult. And then there are turns in the plot that we were not expecting – except that we were expecting Lord Piggott-Dunceby? to pursue and confront Sir Lionel, the Himalayas).

But, everything ends rather nicely with Sir Lionel undergoing lessons in humility, treating Mr Link as an equal – and, of course, in love with Adelina.

So, you see that it might not be so much interest to children. On the other hand, it might provide a pretext for self-conscious adults to go to an animated film to enjoy themselves!


1. The title? Expectations?

2. The film for an adult audience, children and family?

3. The animation style, stop-motion, characters, situations, action? The musical score?

4. The strength of the voice cast and the variety of types and accents?

5. Sir Lionel Frost, Hugh Jackman’s voice? The 19th century British explorer, his ambitions, to belong to the club, in addition to Loch Ness, his presumptions, playing the music, the monster, his associate and his walking out? Seeking new missions? the letter from Washington State?

6. The association, the head, snobbery, ridicule, not above hiring of thugs, the paid assassin, the attempts on Sir Lionel?

7. Sir Lionel, the wife of his associate, the visit, the thug, her decision to join? The expedition, the searching, the thug in his pursuit?

8. The maps, the travel illustrations of the journeys?

9. The Missing Link, Zach Galifianakis and his voice, appearance, manner, lonely, educated, writing, culture, plans and hopes? Sir Lionel calling him Mr Link? His preferring the name Susan?

10. The decision to go to India, trains and ships? The thug?

11. The way, on the ship, the dangers – in the comic touches?

12. India, the exploration, the expedition?

13. Into Tibet, wanting to find Shangri- La, nobody speaking English, the woman in the village, her guidance, going to her mother, the interview and the warnings, the jokes about chicken on her head, the trek?

14. Finding the valley, the Yeti community, the court and its pomp, the Elder and her manner, Emma Thompson’s voice? Against the intruders, imprisoning them?

15. The prison experience, the escape?

16. The English lord, his pursuit, the assassin, the confrontation on the bridge, the cracks, falling? The action sequences, Sir Lionel, Adalina, Mr Link, their being saved?

17. The escape, the dismissal of the Yeti community? The Lord and his return, the assassin? The confrontation of the disaster?

18. Sir Lionel, reassessing himself, in love with his associate, the future, Mr Link as a help?

19. The humour, action, and the attack on British snobbery?

BACK OF THE NET

Australia, 2018, 86 minutes, Colour.
Sofia Wylie, Kate Box, Trae Robin, Tiarnie Coupland, Christopher Kirby, Melissa Bonne, Raj Labade, Gemma Chua- Tran, Yasmin Honeychurch, Ashleigh Ross.
Directed by Louise Alston.

How many times have we seen this film? Well, not exactly this film, but all those films about underdogs, especially in sport, and their overcoming all obstacles to win. We might call it the Rocky Syndrome!

Yes, this is exactly what this film is about and will appeal to audiences who want to take the side of the underdogs and see them triumph.

Back at the Net is an Australian film although, like some others in recent years, the central character is from the United States and finds herself in New South Wales. Cory, Sofia Wylie, is a bright student with an absorbing devotion to science and is excited because she has been chosen for a special scientific voyage in the Southern Ocean. She is hyper-excited but always has everything planned, and ahead of time.

As her parents fly off from LAX to India, she flies (by Qantas, of course) to Sydney, heads for the bus, all excitement, nods off on the shoulder of Oliver (Trae Robin in his first feature film – and it shows at times), waking up on the south coast of New South Wales, looking for the dock for the ship. Only, she has boarded the wrong bus and is now part of a summer camp for soccer training. She tries her best to catch up with the ship but it is out to sea, cannot turn round, too expensive to helicopter out there… The only thing is to accept that she has to train at soccer. Obviously, with her glasses and science books, she can be named the least obvious to succeed. In fact, with three sympathetic girls she shares a room with (one aboriginal, one Asian, and she herself is African-American), they become a team WOTB (the Worst of the Best).

It’s not really a spoiler to say that Oliver will be something of a heartthrob, top soccer player, intrigued by Cory. And it is not really a spoiler to anticipate the archetypal mean girl, Edie (Tiarnie Coupland), jealous of Oliver, dismissive of Cory, ruining her science demonstration, mocking the girls.

How can the WOTB overcome their limitations, especially the fact that Corey cannot even kick a ball into the net? The answer: Physics! Cory can do all kinds of physics calculations in her head (and they appear on the screen). What about calculating force, length, height, energy in kicking a ball so that a goal will be scored? And who will score it, we might wonder!

Which is to say that it is all quite predictable but, for many audiences, that does not matter at all. It is the getting there and the way of getting there that counts. Also, they and we are fortunate to have a very cheery sportsmistress coach, Kate Box.

Because this is a girls’ soccer team, references to the Matildas, Back of the Net has an immediate potential audience of young girls (and their parents, teachers and coaches), especially young girls who want to play soccer.


1. An Australian story? A soccer story?

2. New South Wales locations, the south coast, the camp and school, accommodation, playing fields? The score and songs?

3. The title, soccer – and Cory’s ability to do the physics for kicks and moves?

4. Cory, the delivery of the ball, spraying the ball, her project and early preparation? Her relationship with her parents? Their trip? Her course? Arriving in Sydney, talking, getting the wrong bus?

5. Sitting next to Oliver, going to sleep, discovering the wrong place, her attempts to alter the situation, interview with the coach, the assignment to the room?

6. The girls, the group, aboriginal, Asian, Cory and African-American? They’re becoming friends, bonding together, action together, soccer practice together, the various talents, dancing, sewing?

7. Cory and science, her books, going to class, the diagrams on screen for her calculations, the electricity and the pickle, easy sabotaging her experiment?

8. Oliver, his story, soccer, wanting to be picked, his friendship with Lewis’s? The encounter with Cory, the attraction? Edie in the past? Talking with Cory, helping? Cory and her growing suspicions because of Edie?

9. Edie, nasty, her story, sabotaging the experiment, locking Cory in the dressing room?

10. The exuberance of the coach, her personality? Practices? The Worst of The Best? The details of practice, Cory and her poor kicking?

11. Cory her reaction, the decision to win, the planning, Cory and the physics, the practice?

12. Contact with her parents, offering of the school in India, her not wanting to go, at home with the group?

13. The sewing of the uniforms, the first round, playing, success?

14. The night before the match, the encounter with Oliver, the drink, her suspicions and Oliver, having to get over them?

15. Her being locked in, the singing of the anthem to get more time to get her out, Oliver and saving her?

16. The play, the win, Cory’s final kick in the physics, the award, Edie mellowing and asking for help? And Cory staying at the school?

THUNDER ROAD

US, 2018, 90 minutes, Colour.
Jim Cummings, Kendall Farr, Nican Robinson, Jocelyn De Boer, Chelsea Edmudson, Macon Blair.
Directed by Jim Cummings.

In 2016, Jim Cummings released a 13 minute short film, Thunder Road, with inspiration from the song by Bruce Springsteen (suggested by the small-budget film of 1958 of the same name starring Robert Mitchum). Encouraged by the favourable critical response and awards, he has developed what was basically a eulogy at his mother’s funeral into a 90 minute film.

It is definitely a Jim Cummings film. Not only did he write and direct, he gives a rather extraordinary performance, appearing in almost every sequence of the film. Admittedly, it may take some time to get used to his screen presence, his distraught character, some oddball behaviour, but it is well worth the wondering wait.

Cummings plays a Texas police officer, Jim Arnaud, sitting in the church, his daughter and ex-wife present, other relations and members of the police force supporting him. He is invited up to speak, dressed in his uniform, expressing his grief for his mother, suddenly convulsed in weeping and then just as suddenly taking control – well not quite control because of the erratic things he speaks of, recollecting his mother’s love of Thunder Road, beginning to sing and gyrate at the front of the church. Then, carrying his daughter, he is ushered from the church.

One could say that watching the film, the audience is put in the position of, say, a counsellor or therapist, listening and observing what the client is trying to communicate, evaluating his relationship with his ex-wife, care of his daughter, seeing him in police action when he has been commanded not to turn up, relying on his fellow officer and his family for some support, in and out of control, violent outbursts, his wondering and we, the attentive counsellors, wondering where this will all go, how it will end up.

He has a relationship with his young daughter but she is becoming more and more dependent on her mother, leaving her father, almost spurning him. Jim and his wife are in the process of divorce. It is certainly taking its toll on him. He does have a sister that he can turn to, a woman of good advice, which is something of a relief for him and for us.

He has a busy lawyer for the divorce, just checking on details before they go into the court. He gives testimony for himself but alienates the judge by miscalculating in what he should say. He loses.

So, this is a portrait of a man on the edge – and having to deal with an ultimate tragedy which he did not anticipate. Nor did we.

Clearly, the film is a very personal commitment by Jim Cummings, admirable in its way, maybe alienating some audiences, but really an impressive tour-de-force performance.

1. The title? Bruce Springsteen song? The film of 1958?

2. The contribution of Jim Cummings, writing, directing, performing?

3. Texas, the town, church, homes, the streets? Police precincts? The court? The countryside? The musical score?

4. The introduction to Jim Arnaud, his age, experience, manner, police, in uniform? The back of the church, the invitation to speak? His moods on and off, weeping and control, the meandering talk, the memories, Bruce Springsteen, the singing, gyrating? Taking his daughter out? People offering sympathy?

5. The background of his mother, the ballet, renovations, selling? Jim and his marriage, his ex-wife, relationship with his daughter? Issues of custody, the visits, taking his daughter out, the growing awkwardness, growing alienation? His ex-wife and her life, men, drugs?

6. The work, the partnership with Nate, out on the beat, his erratic behaviour and moods, Nate and his support, the authority and the orders for him to go home, upset?

7. His being determined, his image of himself, Nate and the family, the meals, the later clash with Nate, then reconciliation?

8. On the job, exercising violence, the authorities confronting him, his being sacked? His reactions?

9. The divorce, the late arrival of the lawyer, checking the details, the judge, his speaking in court, is interpreting the situation, the judge’s negative reaction?

10. The drive to visit his sister, her memories of their mother, her wise advice?

11. His future, uncertain, his career, his daughter?

12. The sum news of the death of his wife, going to see, her taking the drugs, his grief yet slapping her? Blaming her for dying, the effect on the daughter?

13. The subsequent effects, the relationship with his daughter – his future?

THE CRIME OF DR HALLETT

US, 1938, 68 minutes, Black-and-white.
Ralph Bellamy, Josephine Hutchinson, William Gargan, Barbara Read, John Dusty King.
Directed by S.Sylvan Simon.

Films about doctors were popular in the 1930s. This one concern several doctors working in Sumatra, in the jungle, searching for a cure for a disease, experimenting on monkeys.

It is a star vehicle for Ralph Bellamy in the title role. He is dedicated but determined, working with a collaborator, played by William Gargan, and joined by a woman doctor, unusual for the time, leading to a discussion about women and equality and the professions. She is played by Josephine Hutchinson.

The young doctor, wealthy, educated at Harvard, arranges to come to work with Dr Hallett. Hallett is not impressed and gives him menial jobs to do. When the young doctor comes across a possibility for a cure, he defers to Dr Hallett. And, agreeing to an experiment, he is injected with the disease confident that Dr Hallett’s cure will be effective. It is not and he dies.

Dr Hallett is remorseful for his treatment of the young man and organisers a transfer of names, that the young doctor be buried under Dr Hallett’s own name – a tribute to him for his self-sacrifice and working on the cure.

However, there is a further complication when the young doctor’s widow arrives, wanting his money, causing financial problems.

Which means then that the film is about medicine, difficulties in pioneering cures, a film for women’s equality – as well as some final melodramatic complications.


DANCING AT THE VATICAN

UK, Argentina, Italy, Venezuela. 2019, 40 minutes, Colour.
Charles Sabine.
Directed by Brian Moore.

Not an expected activity! However, at the end of this moving documentary, a number of pilgrims move up to the stage of the papal audience hall, a popular Argentinian singer, Axel, playing his guitar, a spirit of joy. By this time, we have come to know who these dancers are.

The group at the papal audience had a slogan, “Hidden No More�.

Which makes us realise that, if we Had not had direct contact with someone suffering from a particular illness, a named disease, like Parkinson’s or Alzheimer’s, we do not know much about the illness at all. Since the disease featured in this documentary is Huntington’s Disease, we realise that it does not have quite the public profile as, say, Parkinson’s, where, again, people in the public profile, like Pope John Paul II or actor, Michael Fox, are well-known.

So, this brief film serves as a deserved public recognition of those, around the world, who suffer from Huntington’s Disease. And the realisation that it is not contagious, but rather is inherited. The producer of the film is a British journalist, himself and inheritor, Charles Sabine, who had the idea of enlisting Pope Francis in the campaign for better recognition and understanding.

The focus is on a community in Venezuela, on Lake Maracaibo. We are introduced to the population of the small fishing village, quite a number of whom have the disease. For those who have not experienced it, watching the behaviour, the symptoms, a kind of physical jerkiness at times, some seeming lack of awareness of what is happening can be disturbing. In this village, the disease is not understood, people being very wary, misjudging the behaviour of those who have inherited HD.

Sabine notes that the ways of Vatican bureaucracy are slow-moving but he perseveres in writing to the officials for an audience with the Pope. And, after some months, there is an agreement, not just for a private audience but for a large gathering, Pope Francis to speak, to welcome the visitors, to meet and embrace many of them. And, so, we accompany a young boy who has been shunned by the village, bullied at school because of his family, and a 15-year-old girl from Argentina. (And there is some delight when the boy is presented with a football and a jersey by a celebrated player and Axel arrives to play a song for the girl delighted and awestruck.)

The group is sponsored by an Italian doctor, member of the Italian Senate, who brings a delegation to a session in the Senate. She also introduces the group to the Pope and there are quite a number of doctors and specialists in the papal audience.

And, to the delight of the organisers, Pope Francis actually says out loud the HD slogan, Hidden No More, in English, Italian, Spanish. No wonder, the group danced in the Vatican.

Social groups, parish groups, school classes, all could, within a short space of time, be emotionally involved leading to greater understanding and appreciation of Huntington’s Disease, the burden of those who have inherited it, the day by day challenges their carers.

THE BESTOWAL

US, 2018, 90 minutes, Colour.
Sam Brittan, Sharmita Bhattacharya.
Directed by Andrew de Burgh.

This is a film written and directed by Andrew de Burgh, in his 20s. A man of international experience, born in England, English father, Indian mother, and internationally travelling as he grew up. He has appeared as an actor, directed short films, and declares that he is a partial for action adventure spectaculars.

This is not immediately evident from The Bestowal. Rather, this is a very quiet film, three acts and an epilogue, but the three acts taking place in a room, generally with close-ups of each of the protagonists and their conversations. There is an epilogue which goes outdoors,, gazing at sky and planets in the distance.

And, there is no action to speak of in the film except for the conversations, action of the mind and of the emotions, the director says ‘cerebral’ and ‘socially conscious’. The emphasis is on words, articulation of ideas, words in conversation and discussion. The screenplay demands listening on the part of the audience rather than watching, something the equivalent of a radio experience but the audience able to look at and read the body language.

The focus is on a man who has suicidal thoughts, is dissatisfied with his life which has been busy and successful – but lacks fulfilment, is incomplete. He experiences a visitor from another dimension, Death. She comes in the form of a beautiful woman, dressed immaculately in blue, echoes of the Indian background of the actress.

The man interacts with Death, discussing the philosophical implications of life and its meaning, further discussions about the cosmos. The man decides to live and will meet Death in decades to come. After the first encounter, the man travels, discovers the world and people, their troubles and needs and does his best to respond to them. At a third visit, there is a possibility of reassessing his life and how he has responded to the challenges offered him by Death.

Finally, there is a brief epilogue with the couple sitting, life achieved, but still reflecting on life and its meaning.

1. A small, independent film? Intended audience?

2. A film of dialogue, a focus on words, exploration of the meanings, philosophical and cosmological implications? Discussion?

3. The basic sets, interiors, close-ups of the characters? The epilogue, an outer world, the cosmos, planets? The musical score?

4. A film in three acts, plus an epilogue? The passing of time, decades? The background of the events in Steven’s life?

5. Steven, his age, the meaning of his life, his work, reassessing, suicidal? His work and activities, looking for meaning, a good man, his hopes?

6. Death, the presence, interdimensional, female, beautiful, her clothes, the Indian background? A capacity for listening, challenging? Promise of
future meetings?

7. Steven returning, Death and her absence? The years passing, his age, selfless, travel, experience of the world and its problems, Death and her reappearance? Listening to what Steven had achieved? Continued challenge, advice? Her role as a sounding board for him?

8. The third visit, Steven and his life, Death’ s continued reappearance? Final discussions?

9. Audiences interested in the philosophical interpretation of life, its meaning? The detail of the exploration? The universe, life before the Big Bang? Life in other parts of the universe? Death and her role of moving through the dimensions? Steven and the ultimate meaning of his life?

10. The epilogue, the bond between Steven and Death, their sitting, talking, the universe, the vision of the planet – their going outside, a heavenly experience?

FIVE FEET APART

US, 2019, 116 minutes, Colour.
Hayley Lu Richardson, Cole Sprouse, Moises Arias, Kimberly Hebert Gregory, Parminda Nagra, Claire Forlani, Emily Baldoni, Gary Weeks.
Directed by Justin Baldoni.

This review is based not on a preview screening for critics but on a Sunday afternoon suburban screening, thirty or so in the cinema, most the same age as the central characters up there on the screen, late teens, young adults.

This is definitely a young adults story. It must have worked well with our audience, so many of them sobbing, one girl close by, audibly sobbing. (And, when the lights came up during the final credits, quite a number of sniffles suddenly being supplanted by self-conscious giggles about the sobbing.)

Most of the action takes place inside a hospital. The two central characters have cystic fibrosis. They are in a strict regimen of medication, of wearing masks, of keeping six feet away from each other to avoid infection from cystic fibrosis. The staff is sympathetic but also strict.

We are first introduced to Stella (Hayley Lu Richardson), late teens, ill for some years, devoted parents, entering hospital while her friends go on vacation, orderly in her life, referring often to herself sometimes as OCD. She certainly can be bossy. In passing, she encounters Will (Cole Sprouse), disapproving of some of his behaviour, considering him irresponsible in his not keeping to his regimen, his joking. In hospital is Po (Moises Arias) Stella’s friend from childhood days. Eventually, they will form something of a Three Musketeers group.

One of the values of this kind of film (and other films like The Fault in our Stars) is that it offers a younger audience who don’t spend a lot of time thinking about illness let alone the prospect of early death, an opportunity to see characters, empathise with them, learn from them about the challenge of terminal illness.

Which means then that these films about illness are versions of romantic comedies, this time romance at a distance, 5 feet apart, some funny situations, and, as the parody of romantic comedies in Isn’t it Romantic mention, nowadays the presence of the gay friend (Po here) and some equivalent of a dancing sequence. This time, in fact, with Stella and Will escaping from the hospital, dancing and skating on ice – and the sudden shock of it being thinner ice than they anticipated.

Stella demands a deal with Will, that he be stricter and responsible and that she will allow him to draw her. This enables them to be more honest with themselves, be more honest with each other – including a moving sequence at a pool where they reveal their disfigured bodies to each other.

There is quite some melodrama towards the end of the film, an event certainly not anticipated and causing quite a crisis when suddenly the lungs of a dead girl become available for transplant.

The film does not avoid realities of death but presents them in a humane way that a healthy teenage audience can deal with – and, after the sobs, reflect on more realistically. Not a bad thing.

1. A film of illness, treatment, relationships?

2. The title, literal application for health protection? The continued reminders throughout the film, the characters at each end of the pole? Breaking through the six feet barrier?

3. The city, the hospital, interiors, exteriors? Flashbacks? Going outside, the winter night, the snow and the ice? The musical score?

4. The opening, introduction to Stella, her friends, discussing holidays? Late teens, their approach to life, happiness? Stella farewelling, going to hospital? Her illness, cystic fibrosis, breathing, her lungs? The dangers? The hope for a transplant? Stella comfortable in hospital, the equipment, the regime? Barb and her care, the rest of the staff? The requirements? Medical, wearing the mask, Stella making a home in her room?

5. Walking, noticing Will, his friends and their sexual behaviour in his room? Her disapproval? Going upstairs, looking at the babies? Will’s approach, her not responding, then talking, her severity and judgement? Seeing him on the roof, his jokes, her not finding them funny, locking him out? The discussions, the deal, her insisting on his keeping to his regime, his wanting to draw her? Their arguments, the encounters, the gradual attraction? The difficulties of the regime, 6 feet, danger of infection, touch? Stella and her obsessiveness, OCD demands? His drawing? Starting
on his regime?

6. Time passing, their talking, bonding, sharing, their age, his 18th birthday? The family stories? Stella telling the story of Abby, her death dive, dying alone? Stella blaming herself, her grief? The bond with her parents? Will and his glamorous and focused mother?

7. Stella and her friendship since childhood with Po? His manner, gay, in love with Michael, the breakup? Memories of childhood, talking with Will, no sexual threat?

8. The risks and the wearing of masks, Stella producing the pole, at each end of it, going to watch the fish, going to the pool, talking, falling in and splashing? The date, Stella and the dress? The significance of the time at the pool, each revealing their limited and wounded bodies? The temptation to kiss?

9. Will and his 18th birthday, his friends not coming, Stella phoning and apologising? Will’s day and the disappointment? The messages, the balloons, Will following the balloons, the surprise party, his friends all there, Po preparing the banquet, the photos, Barb catching them?

10. Po, the collapse, his death? Stella watching? Her grief, going to her room, the eruption and smashing?

11. Stella talking with Will, wanting to see the lights, going for the walk, the talk, her wearing a glove and their being able to touch, on the ice, skating, and receiving the news about the transplant, her decision not to go? Falling on the ice, Will and his reviving Stella, mouth-to-mouth? Saving her?

12. The preparation for the lung transplant, Will telling her to have the transplant for his sake? The staff urging her not to waste the lungs? Her doing it for him? The parents and their anxiety when Stella was lost, Will’s mother and her concern? Will and his bill of health, not infected by Stella but Barb telling him that the regime was not having any effect?

13. The success of the operation, Will and his farewell, getting Stella to close her eyes? The gift of the book of sketches?

14. Stella, talking to camera, reflecting on her experiences, the importance of touch and love, various images from the past and of capital?

15. A film for teenagers – and to be conscious of the reality of illness and the reality of death?

THE KINDERGARTEN TEACHER

US, 2018, 96 minutes, Colour.
Maggie Gyllenhaal, Gael Garcia Bernal, Michael Chernus, Parker Sevak.
Directed by Sarah Colangelo.

While The Kindergarten Teacher might be an ordinary enough title for a film, the story here is not what we might have been expecting. This is a remake of an Israeli film which made quite an impact, obviously tempting Hollywood to do an English-language version.

This is a significant role for a significant performance by Maggie Gyllenhaal. Usually is a very poised presence on screen, it is difficult to accept her as a teacher mixing with the littlies. But, credit to her, her performance becomes credible and creditable.

The teacher, Lisa, has been working for many years, her husband also working, teenage children at home with whom she does not always connect. She has probably always connected well with the kindergarten group, able to play with them, gently instruct them, nurture them, her home situation moving her more to her towards the classroom than life at home.

The other complication is that she is an aspiring poet. The difficulty is that she has been aspiring for many years, writing the poems, bringing them to an adult education course, led by Gael Garcia Bernal, who appreciates her presence, encouraging her, but not praising her finished work.

Then, a little boy, Jimmy (Parker Sevak) is heard speaking some verses. Lisa listens, is charmed and amazed by what she hears from a five-year-old. And this begins a serious turn of events, for Jimmy, for Lisa, for some moments of truth (which may be too late).

What is Lisa to do so charmed as she is by Jimmy’s poems? And he continues to create them, the bully innocent as to how fine they are as problems. Lisa takes them to her adult education class, obviously not revealing that they are not hers, the lecturer impressed, their both making a move, sexually.

Jimmy’s father, on the other hand, is one of those men’s men who doesn’t respond to poetry particularly well (or at all) and insists that Jimmy goes to sports practice. And, as a young boy, Jimmy seems oblivious to this tussle between the adults.

What is Lisa to do? She decides to enter Jimmy into a poetry competition, taking him there without the permission of his father, urging him to recite – and his receiving a claim. By this time, Lisa has bypassed support from her husband and children and becomes reckless.

In these years when child protection is so important, harm to children seems more significant. There are other ways of doing harm then sexual abuse and Lisa goes beyond bounds in trying to possess the boy – and it is interesting that Jimmy becomes more alert to this than we might have thought.

So the film is a strong drama about a competent woman who begins to fail, who puts herself into a more than compromising position, all in the name of benefiting the child, but will have to answer for her choices.

1. The human drama, the portrait of the teacher, school and education, portrait of families? And the picture of the gifted child?

2. The American city, the kindergarten and the classrooms, homes, the adult education classes, the recital? The countryside, the hotel, going for the swim? Authentic atmosphere? The musical score?

3. The portrait of Lisa, Lisa Gyllenhaal and her screen presence? A rage, relationship with her husband, the tensions, the sexual relationship and love? The relationship to the children, teenagers, going on their own way, their mother and her ambitions for them? The arguments, the apologies? The scenes at home, the meals, asking the children to come to meals? The portrait of family relationships?

4. Lisa at school, her relationship with the children, the work with her assistant, the various activities, the naps? The teachers at the school? School life?

5. Jimmy, in the class, his poem, Lisa’s response, he is reciting, her writing down the lines, the further poems, her encouragement and enthusiasm? Jimmy, his age, precocious? Small? His father not replying on the phone, Lisa going to see his uncle to make a plea, the father’s disdain for his brother, wanting his son to be ordinary, sports arrangements? His not permitting his son to go to the recital?

6. Lisa, the adult education class, the teacher and his enthusiasm, the presentation of poems, Lisa and her own poems and ambitions, her writing, conventional material, reading it out? The readings of Jimmy’s poems, as her own, the teacher’s response? The visit to him, his sexual approach, apology, the kiss, the sexual encounter and its effect?

7. The recital, Lisa taking Jimmy, making excuses? Dressing him up, the travel, the rehearsals for his poems, the recitations? Audience questions and applause? The teacher’s reaction, denunciation of Lisa, excluding her from the class?

8. Packing up, taking Jimmy on the trip, the drive, the hotel, on the beach, swimming, the shower – and Jimmy’s phone call, telling the police he had been kidnapped, the police’s arrival, Lisa’s explanations? His father’s response?

9. The consequences for Lisa, being banned, the future?