UNICORN STORE

US, 2017, 92 minutes, Colour.
Brie Larson, Samuel L.Jackson, Joan Cusack, Bradley Whitford, Mamoudou Athie, Hamish Linklater.
Directed by Brie Larson.

For audiences who enjoy films which have the light, even the lightest, of touches, enjoy contemporary fairytales which turn out to be fables, lessons about growing up.

After Room and her Oscar, Brie Larson began to build up a career which led to her becoming Captain Marvel. However, here is a small film which she directed in 2017. She plays the central character, a childlike woman (and we have seen home movies of her as a little girl, growing up, her art and imagination). Her great desire is to have a unicorn as companion, moving beyond the imaginary unicorn of her childhood.

When she decides to go out to work, she receives an invitation to a mysterious while Store and is introduced to The Salesman. While Samuel L.Jackson is genial, his performance is rather crazy in manner, talk, eccentric clothes and even more eccentric hairstyle.

In the background are Kit’s parents, sensible workers, Joan Cusack and Bradley Whitford. Also significant in her life is Virgil, handymen, a sympathetic listener, building her a stable for her hoped-for unicorn Mamoudou Athie, the journalist in The Front Runner.

Those who want something light for their entertainment might try this – although many may find the story and the treatment too twee.

1. Fairytale – with many fairytale touches? Reality and fantasy?

2. The home movies and the setting, Kit as a baby, child, artwork, growing up? As a young adult, painting, the rainbow colours, the gold dust? The transition to the competition, the judges, her failing? Her disappointment, in her bedroom, watching TV, sullen? Her relationship with her parents, jovial, encouraging, their work?

3. Home scenes, office scenes, the streets, the Unicorn Store, magic interiors? The building of the stable for the unicorn? Atmosphere? Musical score?

4. Kit, growing up, a fantasy world, yet a sense of failure, low self-esteem? Watching the television, seeing the commercials about temporary positions, her decision to change, dressing and her mother’s suit, going to the office, the quick interrogation, working on the copying machine, her hand, Gary approaching her, chatting with her, inviting her out, praising her ingenuity? Her relationship with the others at work, meeting the young women, their being critical of her? Her defiance?

5. The cards and the invitations, her puzzle? Finding the Store? The encounter with the Salesman, discussions, his response to her, her wishes, confiding about the unicorn? His promise? The effect on her, wanting to build a stable, the recommendation for Virgil? His coming, friendship with him, the discussions, his promises, his abilities, the stable?

6. Kit and her fantasies, the discussions with her parents? The fantasy of the unicorn? Virgil and his doubts? The phone call, the Salesman, the invitation? Her confusion, yet deciding to go to the Store? The cheerful Salesman, her questioning his truth, the revelation of the unicorn, her conversation with the unicorn, the review of her life, the importance of the unicorn, talking to him, playing chess with him, his being her support?

7. Virgil arriving, the Salesman, the Listening to Kit, a change of heart, giving up, willing to give the unicorn to someone else in need? Her happiness? Leaving with Virgil, hand in hand? The encounter with the troubled woman wanting the store?

8. Virgil and his personality, the building of the stable, the decorating it with so much of Kit’s art?

9. A contemporary fairytale, a fable about facing the reality and growing up?

Us

US, 2019, 115 minutes, Colour.
Lupita Nyong’o, Winston Duke, Shahadi Wright Joseph, Evan Alex, Elisabeth Moss Tim Heidecker.
Directed by Jordan Peele.

There was a great deal anticipation for Us. It was not only horror fans who enjoyed Jordan Peele’s Get Out in 2017 (and it won an Oscar for best original screenplay), but also those who like serious drama with social overtones (and undertones). Perhaps it is inevitable that audiences will say that Us is not as good as…, But they will also probably admit that it is quite good in its own right.

How much of a clue is there in the title? Us or US? And, especially for American audiences, will they see the characters as Us – African-Americans?, white Americans? And, there are quite some complications that develop as to who really is the Us.

Jordan Peele’s early career was as a comedian and there are very many funny moments during this film, the wry remark, the offhand comment, silly/goofy situations, ironies. And sometimes they come quite unexpectedly, sometimes in the middle of a very tense moment (some audiences not wanting to be disturbed in their terror, others finding it an amusing relief for a moment). But, after writing and directing Get Out, peel has become more assured in his creating horror tales, horror situations.

He provides a lot of eerie background, focusing on the little girl, Adelaide, her jovial father, her wandering away from her parents at a fair where she resists the attractions, even the Ferris wheel, but does go into one of those haunted house kinds of shows (with a horading inviting visitors to find out who they are) where she experiences some terror, eerie sounds, unable to escape, halls of mirrors, and a reflection of herself as she watches (but from the back). Of course, in retrospect, this is extraordinarily important as is the puzzle by her parents about her behaviour after she had been lost for only 15 minutes.

Then it all becomes very cheery, 15 years or more later, Adelaide married to a friendly and humorous husband, Gabe (Winston Duke) and with two young children, Zora (Shahadi Wright Joseph) and Jason (Evan Alex). Adelaide is played by Oscar-winner Lupita Nyong’o. She offers a striking performance, a range of moods, loving wife, devoted mother, apprehensive mother – and that is only the beginning. Gabe decides that they will go on vacation and they will visit the beach and the boardwalk, where Adelaide first had her terror.

Lots of comedy with Gabe and his mismanagement of the boat that he buys. Then, on the beach, meeting up with friends, white friends, Kitty and Josh (Elizabeth Moss, again showing her versatility as an actress and Tim Heidecker). So far, so good.

However, this is where the horror begins and one might say goes on full pelt from there. The family sees a mysterious foursome, in red jumpsuits, standing in their driveway. And these mysterious characters are replicas of themselves, zombie overtones, giving the four members of the cast ample opportunity for diversity in their performances as one of the selves pursues the other self, murderously. And, when the family thinks they might have won and escape to visit Kitty and Josh, the same happens for them and their two daughters.

So, the tension revs up, many horror moments, gory moments, and the continual puzzle of who are these zombielike replicas.

Eventually, and piling on the horror atmosphere, there are explanations involving parallel worlds or, rather, an underworld in American tunnels with the clones out of control, resenting their parallel characters above. So, testing our responses to class issues, race issues, American underclass and resentments.

Eventual confrontations in the film might have ended there – but, there is a long explanation speech which troubles our understanding. It makes us leave the cinema trying to work out what actually happened (although we see this) and how credible it is and what are the consequences. Which means then that Us remains with the audience well after the final credits. Probably means we should see it again.

1. The title? Us and US United States?

2. The director, his success with Get Out? Expectations? His background in comedy? The blending of comedy and horror?

3. Horror, but allegorical? The underground world, repressed, parallel world, bizarre behaviour, mimicking the upper world, the underworld resentments? Class race issues? War and an uprising – in the era of Donald Trump and his supporters rising up?

4. The prologue, Adelaide as a little girl, her relationship with her parents, at the fair, the father and his enthusiasm, shooting, the prize? Her mother leaving her for the moment, her wandering, the boardwalk, the shows, the sideshow inviting audiences to come to find out who they are? Her going inside, the devices for fright, the increasing noise, the hall of mirrors? Her seeking the exit, her seeing her double, from the back?

5. The aftermath, listening to her parents discussing her being missing, her not talking? 15 minutes? This episode in the light of the final revelations?

6. Adelaide, adult, marriage and family, her relationship with Gabriel? Gabriel Is Genial, the children, their verve? Their lifestyle, middle-class? Going for a holiday, the holiday house, going to the beach, Adelaide wary about the boardwalk and her memories? The trip, bonding?

7. At the beach, Jason wandering off, Adelaide’s concern, searching for him? Her sense of tension?

8. With Kitty and Josh? The visits, the meals? At the beach, their daughters? The screenplay bringing in white characters?

9. Adelaide, wanting to go home? The tension, the appearance of the doppelgängers, in the dark, outside the house, wearing red? Sinister?

10. The consequences of the visit, the family going outside the house, the buildup of the conflict, each member of the family with the doppelgänger, the frightening double, Gabriel, the fight, wanting to get to the boat? Zora and the conflict? Jason, wearing his mask, his being taken? Adelaide and the more elaborate fight with her double, Red?

11. The destruction, the family in their victory, hurrying to the house for Kitty and Josh?

12. The doppelgängers for Kitty and Josh, the menace, the fights, the deaths of the daughters? The family wanting to take refuge, the further attacks? Kitty, her seeming death, rising again?

13. The pursuit, the discovery of the alternate world, the introduction to the film and the explanation of the nature of tunnels under the United States? Jason as captive? Adelaide pursuing her son, the confrontation with Red? Red and the extensive explanation of what had happened?

14. The future, the doubles rising up, the consequences for the humans?

15. With the twist at the end, the reinterpretation of Adelaide really as Red, Red as Adelaide, battles, explanations?

16. The film seen as an allegory of contemporary America, race and class, members of society oppressed, rising up?

THE HOLE IN THE GROUND

UK, 2019, 90 minutes, Colour.
Seana Kerslake, James Quinn Markey, Simone Kirby, Steve Wall, James Cosmo, Kati Outinen.
Directed by Lee Cronin.

This is a psychological horror film, though the explicit horror comes in the latter part of the film, even to the presence of mysterious monsters.

A clue is given in the opening sequence, Sarah (Seana Kerslake) at the fair with her son, Charlie (James Quinn Markey) looking at themselves in mirrors, distorted mirrors, sometimes humorous, sometimes monstrous images of themselves. And the suggestion that the audience, looking at the screen, is also looking in a mirror and seeing all kinds of distortions.

For audiences who assume that horror films have touches of the supernatural, have images of monsters, gory moments, this film will be quite a disappointment. Rather, it uses slow buildup, a psychological portrait of a mother and son – intimating suggestions of something not quite normal, upsets in the relationship, gradual revelation of what has happened to the son.

The setting is Ireland, a remote town, ordinary homes and school, but overcast weather on the roads, scenes in a forest – and the sudden revelation of the hole in the ground which turns out to be not just a whole but a vast and deep/wide sinkhole, a crater. And it is shown frequently, evocative of an atmosphere where something mysterious is going on.

As with this kind of storytelling, one way of looking at it is taking it as realistic, home, relationships, school, a loving mother dealing with her son, with the neighbours – even though there is a mysterious woman who appears on the road, threatening, rescued by her husband.

On the other hand, a way of looking at it is in terms of imagination of the central character, going into her mind, her creating the mysterious situations, a psychological drama.

This reviewer had not come across a psychological condition, Capgras Delusion (named after the scientist who identified the syndrome). We can be indebted to a blogger on the IMDb who suggests that the mother, Sarah, has the syndrome, and is possessed by it. Wikipedia makes a suggestion that Capgras Delusion is a ‘delusional misidentification syndrome’, someone believing that a relative or a person close to them is an imposter, not the real self. Watching the film with this in mind makes a lot of sense of the characters, the behaviour, the illusions.

The possibility is raised by the demented woman on the road, believing her dead son was not her real son, warning Sarah that Charlie is not her real son.

If interpreted as a psychological thriller within the central character’s mind, it works very well, slow pace, not in the sense of a monster film, though, as has been said, monsters do appear,

it is a kind of hallucinatory horror thriller.

1. A psychological horror thriller?

2. The Irish locations, characters? Homes, the town, school, the roads, the vast sinkhole in the forest? The underground caves, the monsters? The musical score?

3. The title, the sinkhole, the caverns beyond the sinkhole?

4. The opening, the distorted mirrors? The images of Sarah and Charlie? (And the audience looking into the screen as a mirror – and the distortions of Sarah and of Charlie?

5. The bond between mother and son, the absent father? Sarah and her age, qualifications as a teacher, her studies? The accident and the gash on her forehead? The routines at home, meals, Charlie and his moods, contradicting his mother, reconciliations? Travelling in the car, his whims? At the fair, the fairy floss?

6. The film creating an atmosphere, the family? Charlie disappearing, Sarah chasing him, the discovery of the sinkhole? Its vastness? Charlie continually reappearing after disappearing?

7. Sarah, at school, her friends, the teachers, the stories, the meals?

8. The encounter with Noreen Brady on the road, the ghostly figure? Her standing in the way of the car? Her husband coming to rescue her, apologies? Her delusion that her dead son was not really her son? Her attack on the car, telling Sarah that Charlie was not her son? Her death, face in the mud? Her funeral?

9. The background of the Capgras Delusion, thinking that someone was in impersonator?

10. Sarah, going to the doctor, the nature of her gash and explanations? The potential effect on her brain? The nightmare with Charlie gouging the wound?

11. Charlie’s more erratic behaviour, different appearance, at school, his friends, the talent quest, his performance and singing? Sarah being isolated from the audience, alone? Charlie asking about her response?

12. The effect on Sarah, going to the sinkhole, going through the hole, seeing the monsters, seeing the image of herself? Her taking Charlie, rescuing him? Her being facedown in the mud?

13. The effect, Charlie real or not, Sarah real or not? The scenes of her studying – the past, the present, the future?

THE FEMALE BRAIN

US, 2017, 99 minutes, Colour.
Whitney Cummings, Toby Kebbel, Beanie Feldstein, Cecily Strong, Sofia Vergara, Deon Cole, Blake Griffin, Lucy Punch, James Marsden, Marlo Thomas, Jane Seymour.
Directed by Whitney Cummings.

Is the female brain different from the male brain? If so, how?

This film, written and directed by Whitney Cummings, begins with scientific explanations and the researcher, played by Cummings, with her assistant played by Beanie Feldstein (Jonah Halls’s sister), beginning research and offering lectures, diagrams and x-rays.

Three couples illustrate some conflicts – and are interesting/entertaining in their way. There are also some guest cameos by Marlo Thomas and Jane Seymour.

One of her candidates, Toby Kebbel, is somewhat resistant to her and she has to reassess all her findings as well as reassess her life.

1. The title? Expectations? Similarities between male and female, differences? As illustrated by x-rays and diagrams? As illustrated by the stories and anecdotes?

2. The opening, Julia and her lecture, alerting to the audiences to the nature of the brains, similarities and differences? Her research, her being assisted by Abby, their interactions and comments? The test cases and the couples? Julia and her observations?

3. Kevin, his participation, his principles, his distancing himself from Julia, her coming onto him, his moving away? The effect on Julia, discussions with him, her backing down, final reconciliation?

4. Zoe and Greg, his sport status, his personality, Zoe and her work, not wanting to be dependent? The ups and downs, Greg and his reputation, capitalising on it? Zoe and her independence?

5. Lisa and Stephen, the episode in the bedroom with the mirror, the years of marriage, wanting things to improve, the conversations, the arguments?

6. Lexi and Adam, her being from Britain, the conversations, are continually trying to improve him, his reactions, getting desperate, the breakup? Her visit to her mother, her mother’s demands on her and expectations? Lexi deciding to change, no make-up, coming to apologise? Adam and his reaction, his response to her apology, the possibilities for beginning again, her being herself, allowing him to be himself?

7. Serious aspects, comic aspects?

THE CLAPPER

US, 2017, 89 minutes, Colour.
Ed Helms, Amanda Seyfried, Tracy Morgan, Adam Levine, Russell Peters, Mickey Gooch Jr, P.J.Byrne, Brenda Vaccaro.
Directed by Dito Montiel.

This is a wry comedy written and directed by Dito Montiel who has directed a wide range of films. He has also written the novel on which this film is based.

And the question, who or what is a clapper? The quick answer is those people hired to be present in a television audience who are expected to smile, applaud, sometimes intervene with prepared questions.

Ed Helms plays the central character, a professional clapper, his mother in New York City (Brenda Vaccaro in strident form) watching him on television and phoning him. His best friend is played by Tracy Morgan. He also is very much attached to a young woman who runs a stall. She is played by Amanda Seyfried.

The clapper leads an up-and-down life, valuing his privacy, which is invaded when a team on a rival television show notice that he has been in many audiences, with many disguises, along with some of his friends. They set up a campaign to out him, big signposts and hoardings – and, eventually he is found. The film then shows his participation, his resistance, the television host and the producers using him, he and his friend becoming somewhat celebrities as they are invited to openings of particular functions, but finding that the young woman of the stall has disappeared.

The clapper disappears but returns, appears on the show, his mother flying from New York and invading the show, his offering an apology to the young woman – and happy reunion with her.

1. The of the director? His novel, adapting it to the screen?

2. The Los Angeles settings, the television studios, the streets, homes? The musical score?

3. The title, the role of clappers, they’re being hired to be in audiences, given questions to ask, the applause, the different disguises? Being a clapper as a career? Eddie and Chris? The others and the bonding, the various programs, the discussions?

4. Andi, his personality, his career, proud of it? His friendship with Chris? Is mother’s phone calls, being in New York, her watching him on television? The focus of the film on their appearances as clappers? Their personal lives? The audience getting to know and understand Eddie, his life choices, shy, dithering?

5. Judy, behind the glass, the announcements, people placing their orders? Eddie and his attraction, the conversations? The substitute, Judy out of work? Her personality, at home, the bonding with Eddie? They’re sharing? The difficulties, the publicity, her going away? By herself, eventually seeing Eddie on the television, his declarations, returning, their meeting, the reconciliation, the proposal?

6. The rival television show, the producers, the researchers, the search for Eddie, the clapper, all the sequences on the television show, his various guises and disguises? The billboards in the streets? The public and their response?

7. His avoiding the attention, with Chris, Chris and his ingenuity, giving the information, court? There are eventually appearing on television, the public response, personalities? They’re being invited to a variety of functions?

8. The crisis for Eddie, the publicity, television appearances, the falling out with Judy, the months passing, his need for her?

9. His mother and her friend, boisterous, coming from New York, landing on the television program, the mother taking over the program, the audience watching, the compere, Eddie and the discussions with his mother – in public? Her leaving?

10. The effect on Eddie, finding duty again, the reconciliation? Her matter-of-fact eagerness? Their future?

SLEEPER

Canada/US, 2018, 86 minutes, Colour.
Kara Kilmer, Brett Donahue, Mylene Dinh- Robic, Barbara Gordon, Mike Camacho.
Directed by Philippe Gagnon.

Sleeper is an entertaining enough thriller, opening with the wife shooting her husband – then flashbacks.

The couple have been married for seven years and celebrated it. A happy life has been marred by a miscarriage. The husband seems to be well employed and trusted. She has hopes for the future in the marriage.

The wife becomes suspicious, seeing her husband with another woman, his covering himself. However, a woman claiming to be his mother arrives – and not acting like a mother at all.

In fact, at the bottom of the plot, is the old story of the Soviet Union and now Russia planting sleepers in the United States who will be controlled and contacted when the need arises.

There are complications, shootings, further dangers, help from the FBI (the wife’s best friend turning out to be an agent who has been tracking her husband) and a final set up which is where the film opened, the wife shooting her husband.

1. The title? The ambiguity? Audience awareness of sleepers in American society? Russian sleepers?

2. The American city, homes, restaurants, hospitals, police precincts? Musical score?

3. Jennifer’s story, the tense opening and her shooting Freddie? The flashbacks? In herself, marrying Freddie, the miscarriage and its effect, seven years, his special preparation for the anniversary, declarations of love? Insecurity in herself, the sense of something wrong? Complete ignorance of his other identity? Phoning him, seen him with a woman, suspicions? His explanation about a dissatisfied customer? In the street, the car hitting him, in hospital, coma, her attention and concern? His mother arriving, stern, searching the house, Jennifer suspicions? At the hospital? The detective, the questioning, the information about the driver, going to his house, his explanation of blackmail and concern? Finding his body? Her friendship with Connie, reliance on her? To hospital, Freddie recovering, going to the house, the confrontation with the Russian woman and her presence throughout the story, with his alleged mother? The revelation that Connie was FBI? Being considerate and not doing the revelation until after the wedding anniversary?

4. Freddie, pleasant, ordinary, florist, the woman in the street, his being knocked down, coma, recovery, with Jennifer, the Russian woman and growing up with her, the controller as his mother, guns, hold-ups? The buildup to the final confrontation, Jennifer shooting him? Connie giving him the vest, interrogations, his allegedly being dead, the future, Jennifer picking him up?

5. Connie, the best friend, the revelation of FBI, supporting Jennifer, arranging the confrontation, the best?

6. The Russian woman, her presence, growing up with Freddie? The gun, her not being able to shoot Jennifer, pregnant? The controller, stern, posing as the mother, searching the house, at the hospital, with the guns?

7. The detective, concern, the case going to the FBI?

8. What starts as a romance ends as espionage?

THE LITTLE STRANGER

Ireland, 2018, 111 minutes, Colour.
Domhnall Gleeson, Ruth Wilson, Charlotte Rampling, Liv Hill, Will Poulter, Harry Hadden- Paton.
Directed by Lenny Abrahamson

In many ways this is a very strange film. It also has a title which reveals practically nothing.

The film was directed by Lenny Abrahamson who has made some very significant films over the years, from Irish comedies, to the bizarre story of a man wearing a mask, Frank, and the Oscar-winning effective story of an abduction, Room.

This time he returns to Ireland in 1948, the atmosphere after the end of World War II, a transition time, the crumbling of many traditions – and even of traditional houses and class distinctions.

Domhnall Gleeson plays the local doctor who, as a boy, had visited a mansion where his mother worked. Now he has been called back to treat the maid, encountering the daughter of the house, Ruth Wilson, retired and caring for her family. This includes her brother, wounded in the war, played by Will Poulter, and her mother, a regal Charlotte Rampling.

While there is a narrative about life in the town, the work of the doctor, the focus of the film is on the interior of the mansion and its surroundings. Domhnall Gleeson gives a very seemingly-stayed and stolid performance, perhaps explained by the end of the film. He is attracted to the daughter of the house but is also attracted to its mystique, his memories of past visits, of the little girl, now dead, who taunted him.

The film does not really give much indication in the first part of its move towards horror conventions, a haunted house, the mysterious ghost of the girl and her signs, the effect on the family which is ultimately deadly.

While there are some interesting themes, the film was rather long, takes its time, and audiences may lose interest.

1. An Irish story? The period story?

2. Psychological drama, haunting thriller, horror touches?

3. The title, enigmatic, generic?

4. The locations, the town in the countryside, the mansion, the grounds and the interiors? the kitchen, the rooms and staircases? The musical score?

5. Faraday at the centre of the story? The performance of Domhnall Gleeson, his appearance, manner, seemingly stilted and reserved, lacking in personality?

6. 1948, the doctor, his practice, his substituting, the older doctors, the range of patients and visits? Going to the house, the maid and her illness, her fears? The encounter with Caroline? Roderick and his war experience, disfigurement? Mrs Ayres?

7. 1948, the flashbacks, costumes and decor after World War I? The mother working the house, Faraday, in awe of the house, at the celebration, the encounters with Susan, play? His observing, the sense of class? The effect on his ambitions?

8. His visits, the frequency, the effect on him? His being severe with Roderick, demanding that he come out to the celebration? Roderick and his drinking? His being confined to the institution? His return to the funeral, his reactions?

9. Caroline, attractive, the discussions with the doctor? Mrs Ayres, her age, dignity? The socials, the visitors? Caroline being unmarried, yet at the socials, possible husbands, the dancing, walking with the doctor? The effect, romance, the behaviour in the car, the relationship?

10. Mrs Ayres, aristocratic, agreeable, welcoming the doctor, her family and the tensions, the socials and her behaviour? Memories of her daughter, the death – and the touch of haunting?

11. The maid, her fears, deciding to stay, working the house, the family depending on her?

12. The intimations of the past, the accumulation of the flashbacks, suggestions about the doctor, the grief about the death of Susan, the scratchings and names on the wall?

13. Mrs Ayres, the attack, the bird, her being rescued, her death? The funeral, the presence of her family?

14. Caroline, her reaction, with the maid, her falling to her death?

15. Dr Faraday, what he had attained, his motivations, in himself, the deaths, the response, achievement – and the final image of him as a boy looking over the staircase?

EXTINCTION

US, 2018, 95 minutes, Colour.
Michael Peña, Lizzie Caplan, Amelia Crouch, Erica Tremblay, Emma Booth, Mike Colter, Israel Broussard.
Directed by Ben Young.

Extinction is yet another apocalyptic and post-apocalyptic science fiction thriller. It sounds more ominous with his title. For the first part of the film, there are themes with which the audience is quite familiar. The hero, Michael Peña, is a technician who is plagued by recurring dreams, dreams of terror. He fears an alien invasion. There are also the scenes at home, his relationship with his wife, a town planner played by Lizzie Caplan. And he has two young children.

This creates both an ordinary atmosphere of home life and work as well is a sense of foreboding, especially as the dreams recur and become more menacing and violent.

Then, when the couple are hosting guests at home, the invasion!

And, with the invasion, the themes and treatment are familiar enough, conflict, menace from the invaders, their fearful look and armour, the dangers for the humans, taking refuge in a tunnel. The main drawback, however, consists in the irritating performances by the children, more than upset!

So far, so familiar.

But, just as the audience is settling in to make a judgement that Extinction is ordinary enough, there is quite a twist, quite an unexpected twist which makes the audience reassess what they have been watching. And that’s not such a bad thing to happen. So, extinction turns out to be more interesting than we were expecting.

1. Science fiction? Apocalyptic future? Variation on themes? Its implications?

2. The American city, ordinary, technology, workplaces, homes? The musical score, tension?

3. The transition to the attack on the city, the visuals, special effects, action sequences?

4. The focus on Peter, his nightmares, the attack, the violence? Images of responding to the attack? His waking, Alice and her response, the daughter, the hopes for socials, at work, collapse, more nightmares, the daughter and her disappointment?

5. The focus on Alice, her work as a consultant, the tunnels, praise? Her disappointment with Peter missing out with the girls? The social and the guests?

6. The suddenness of the attack, as in Peters nightmares, the spaceships, the violence, the creatures and their masks, the confrontations and shooting? The guests at the party, fears, the falling balcony? Their taking refuge, the confrontations with the attackers, getting into the tunnels? The fights, the gathering at the railway station, the subway and the train?

7. Peter, as in his dreams, the heroics? Concerned about Alice, her being wounded, carrying her? The two girls (and their overacting – irritating the audience wanting to sympathise?)

8. The creature, being unmasked, human, his name, Miles? His willingness to help Alice?

9. The twist in the plot and its effect? The fact that everyone on earth was manufactured? Memories erased? The driving of the humans from the earth and their regrouping 50 years later, the attack to reclaim Earth?

10. Peter, the realisation that Alice was mechanical? His willingness to give his blood, stabbing his chest, going back into flashbacks?

11. The revelation of the flashbacks, the humans, the television programme the humans talking, everyone a cyborg, living a human life? The fights, David and his role, the fight with the humans, sending them from earth? The cyborgs and their human way of living, created, the finding of the two girls, the girl as a cyborg and the wound in her eye, their being adopted? And living the seemingly human life – memories erased?

12. The final tension, Peter and Alice, the escape, the fight, David and the refugees on the train, the train stopping, the girls reunited with the parents, on the train, going out into the countryside, the future, crossing the bridge and its collapsing behind the train, going to the mountain to a future life?

13. The overall effect, the presuppositions in the first part of the film, the twist in the reversal of humans and cyborgs?

ISN’T IT ROMANTIC

US, 2019, 89 minutes, Colour.
Rebel Wilson, Liam Hemsworth, Adam Devine, Priyanka Chopra, Betty Gilpin, Brandon Scott Jones, Jennifer Saunders.
Directed by Todd Strauss- Schulson.

Well, this is a light comedy which might be called an anti-romantic comedy.

It is a starring vehicle for comedian Rebel Wilson. She is always a jovial presence, and always ready to send herself up (while always retaining her Australian accent).

The film opens with her as a teenager, Natalie, watching romantic television in the 1990s with her critical mother (an unexpected cameo from Jennifer Saunders). Cut to 20 years later and we find that she is quite a successful architect, underestimated by the men in the company, with an associate at a desk near her, sympathetic, but prone to be watching romantic comedies on television. She has plans and designs and brings them to the board meeting – with the young smart executive, played by Liam Hemsworth, mistaking her for the coffee-maker.

However, in the office, is a genial young man, Josh, who is, more or less, in love with her. She takes it for granted – and then is worried that his continual gaze in her direction is aimed at a huge advertising poster, his ogling the model, Pryanka Chopra, and encounters in real life at a cafe while out with Natalie and rescues her from choking. It is infatuation at first sight!

Perhaps this review should have had a recommendation earlier in case the reader is thinking that it is a conventional romantic comedy. It’s not, while at the same time, it is. (Amy Schumer did a similar kind of thing in 2018 with I Feel Pretty – but Amy Schumer always gives a somewhat knowing performance whereas Rebel Wilson is always pleasantly ingenuous.)

Natalie and her friend have a long conversation criticising the conventional romantic comedies, everything that is wrong with them, the forlorn heroine, the dashing hero, the catty associate in the office, the falling in love, the music accompaniment – and comments on fantasy and dance routines.

When Natalie has an accident, the world changes for her in terms of how people see her. Of course, she becomes a romantic heroine, Blake notices her and wants to date her, poor Josh is involved with the model, their engagement is announced – and Natalie realises that she must have left everything too late. (And, the sympathetic worker then becomes dominating in the offie to complete the scenario of difficulties in romantic comedies.)

So, we had all the conventions that have been ridiculed, laughing at them while we actually see them overtaking all the characters – even to elaborate dancing of crowds and the leads in the street.

This is a bit of fluff, poking fun at cinema fluff, which makes it all the more fluffily entertaining.

1. The title? Audience enjoying romantic comedies?

2. The ingredients for romantic comedies? Natalie, watching programs with her mother, her mother’s critical comments? Natalie, growing up to be an architect, her skills, in a man’s world, going to the office, mistaken for the girl who gets the coffee, taking out the rubbish, making all the phone calls to fix things? Her friendship with Whitney, allowing her to watch the romantic comedies? The discussion about all the ingredients, sending them up?

3. Natalie, her hitting her head, in hospital? The attentions of the doctor, seeming glamorous? People praising her? Her bewilderment? Going to the office, the clash with Whitney and the parody of the rivalry in the office? The contrast with Blake and his behaviour, appreciating her, affirming her? Donnie as the gay neighbour, the comments about gay neighbours in romantic comedies, Donnie and his becoming more attentive, glamorising Natalie, advice?

4. Josh, in the office, ordinary looking, his attention to Natalie, her reaction to his advances, thinking that he was looking out the window at the glamorous advertisement? His wanting to go out with her?

5. The romance with Blake, her personal reaction, his scene owning the glamour in her? The dating, her dressing up, the restaurants, the chef and his attentions? The effect on her?

6. The introduction of the musical numbers, singing and dancing in the streets?

7. Josh and the date with Natalie, seeing the model and her choking, his helping her, the romance, the outing, the social with Blake, Natalie beginning to realise the truth? The announcement of the engagement? Natalie and her not liking karaoke? The model and her singing? Natalie and the decision to come out of herself and sing?

8. The return to reality? Her ordinary self, her look, her size? Whitney returning to normal? Blake and his attention? Her presentation of her plan for the architecture for parking lots? Her discovery of the truth about where Josh was looking? Donnie returning to normal?

9. The happy ending the romantic comedy, again singing and dancing in the streets, everybody participating?

10. An engaging attempt to having one’s cake about romantic comedies but yet sending them up!

SHAZAM!

US, 2019, 132 minutes, Colour.
Zachary Levi, Asher Angel, Mark Strong, Djimon Hounsou, Jack Dylan Grazer.
Directed by David F. Sandberg.

Shazam! comes from DC comics. After the various serious films with the super heroes, this is definitely DC comics Jr (very much junior). Its target audience is about the age of the young central character and his friend, 14. And, it probably has a great appeal to those who are still 14 in their imagination.

Somewhere in the DC comics mythology world, there is a wizard called Shazam (Djimon Hounsou). He lives in a cave, growing ancient, his powers receding. In the main hall of this cave, there are large fierce-looking statues who are revealed as the deadly sins, just waiting for the opportunity to come alive and to destroy. Shazam is on the lookout for a worthy successor (the criteria are not particularly clear and do some of those summoned to audition do not seem likely at all!).

There is also a deceptive beginning, a father driving with his two sons, the older son very smug, the younger son, seeming innocent and bespectacled, is continually criticised by his sibling and his father, ending up with a car crash. It will later be revealed that the young boy is not nearly as innocent as he might have seemed, has been rejected by Shazam and has spent many years searching for Shazam in order to take over his magic powers. He has grown up to be played by Mark Strong, an ambitious and relentless villain.

Surprisingly, the specially chosen one is an orphan, abandoned by his mother, going from pillar to post in foster care, never satisfied, forever searching for his mother. His name is Billy Batson (Asher Angel) and, as mentioned, he is 14. He is allotted to yet another foster home, very sympathetic parents with a religious bent, and four other children in the home, an intelligent young woman, a large uncommunicating boy, a little girl, and, the character, also 14, who most people would have chosen to be the new Shazam, given his liveliness in comparison with Billy Batson. His name is Freddie (Jack Dylan Grazer) and he is crippled, bullied at school.

Shazam approves of Billy Batson and the entertaining part of the film is Billy’s discovery of his powers, his outer life as Shazam! And being transformed into a superhero, costume and all, though Billy has to gradually discover all his powers, sometimes hit and miss, sometimes causing disasters which he has to fix, a kind of comic image of Superman. His played by Zachary Levi, all smiles, quite ingenuous, more loquacious than Billy, and also, judging by how he talks and acts, still 14.

Which means then that the audience has sympathy for the young boys and their difficulties in life. However, as the film builds up to a confrontation between Shazam and the ever more sinister villain, acquiring powers, cruelly ambitious – and then those capital sins coming to giant life!

So, for a climax? Not only Billy turning into Shazam but his foster parents and all the kids turned into superhero avatars guaranteeing computer-generated stunt work, images, superhero action.

It certainly looks as they could be a sequel to hope for – but will Billy, Freddie and Shazam grow up?

1. DC comics for young audiences?

2. The realistic aspects, the orphans in foster families? The blending with the Shazam fantasy?

3. The American city, the foster homes, school, the streets? The musical score?

4. Shazam, ancient, his cave, powers, the statues of the capital sins? Their glowing eyes? The threats? The candidates to succeed, the auditions, the tests, failure?

5. The story of Dr Sivana? The boy, his critical brother and father? The car swirling, the crash? As resentment? Growing up, his search for the powers? His ambitions? His manner? His father and the company, confronting them, his father in the wheelchair after the accident? his staff? His artificial eye?

6. Billy, the audition from Shazam? His succeeding? Getting the powers? Zachary Levi as the young Shazam? Comics style? Superman style? Aged 14, discovering his powers, his mistakes and remedying them?

7. The foster system, Billy searching for his mother, eventually finding her, meeting her, the rejection? New family, the genial foster parents, the range of the other children, lifestyle, Billy and his resentments?

8. Freddie, genial character, strong, bullied at school? Billy at 14, his silence, supporting Freddie? Freddie disabled?

9. Billy as Shazam, alter ego, from introvert to extrovert? Going into action?

10. Sivana, his discovery, the confrontation, wanting the powers?

11. The buildup to a confrontation? The family and their support – and their all becoming super heroes? The confrontation is, Sivana, the capital sins and their giant presence?

12. Billy and his final achievement as Shazam?