CATFIGHT

US, 2016, 95 minutes, Colour.
Sandro Oh, Anne Heche, Alicia Silverstone, Amy Hill, Ariel Kavousse, Stephen Gevedon.
Directed by Onur Tukel.

An arresting title but one which audiences with sensitive sensibilities may not want to pursue. And, yes, there are several fights, sometimes with a touch of the vicious, between the two leading women.

The film is something of a character study. The main study is that of Veronica, a woman who has married well, is wealthy, her husband involved in arms deals. She also has a young teenage son who has a capacity for drawing. The other study is that of Ashley, an artist, rather modern in her subjects and style, dominating her assistant, in a relationship, undergoing insemination for a pregnancy.

Sandra Oh is very good as Veronica. Anne Heche has a more difficult role with the temperamental Ashley. Alicia Silverstone is her partner.

The women have known each other at college and may have been friends. At a party where Ashley is a waitress and Veronica a guest, drinking too much, they clash and there is the first catfight.

Veronica spends two years in a coma, waking to find that her husband and son are dead, that she has no money, moves in with the family maid, working on cleaning hotels, eventually going to live with her eccentric aunt in the country. However, Veronica goes to Ashley’s exhibition, sees a painting that represents herself and the fight, wreaks havoc at the gallery, fights Ashley who then spends two years in a coma, depending on the young artist, her assistant, whom she dominated.

There is an ominous war background to the story, arms deals, American sensibilities, Ashley’s painting subjects, Veronica’s son volunteering for service and killed in action. And, when Ashley goes to visit Veronica in the country, Veronica taking comfort in final videos from her son, there is an accident – and a final catfight at the end and a scene to show that this fight was never necessary.

1. The title? Fights between women? The clashes between Veronica and Ashley? Destructive fights?

2. The settings, an affluent world, parties and social, offices? The comparisons with the art world, the studio? Hospitals, comas, physiotherapy? Hotels and cleaning? Art exhibitions? The contrast with the countryside? The musical score?

3. Veronica, her age, her husband and his work, success, contracts? War and armaments? Her son, his age, his artwork, her ambitions for him, for a job to make money? The celebratory party, her drinking?

4. Ashley, the style of her art, Sally as her assistant and imposing on her? The critics and their reactions, the buyers, exhibitions? Her modern style, social comment? Her relationship with Lisa, love, the issue of pregnancy, the artificial insemination? Her anger with Lisa and Lisa carrying around the baby doll as if it were real?

5. The meeting, Ashley as a waitress, memories of the past, the tensions, the viciousness of the fight, Veronica falling down stairs, her coma?

6. In coma for two years, the maid and her giving her the information, the maid working in the hospital, the husband’s death, the son at war, his death? All the money used up though insurance? The physiotherapy, her having to leave? The maid taking her in, staying with her, the work in the hotel, stealing the magazine and the confrontation? Phoning her aunt, her eccentricities, the decision to go to the country? Going to Ashley’s exhibition?

7. Ashley, her life during the two years, the war subjects, the modern style, the use of colours, her discrimination about which to use and not? Sally and her assistance? The critics, the buyers, the buildup to the exhibition? Successful sales?

8. Veronica arriving, the confrontation, tearing down the paintings, the chase into the streets, the fight, Ashley’s injuries?

9. Ashley in coma for two years, Sally passing by, the visit, Sally and her success with her comic book? Helping Ashley, dominating her? Ashlyn the therapy, no money?

10. Veronica, her aunt, the touch of the apocalyptic?

11. Ashley arriving, fight, bonding, Veronica and her comfort from the video of her son, the segments playing? Ashley listening, the water on the camera? Veronica and her rage, Ashley’s response, the fight?

12. The irony of the camera rebooting – and the uselessness of the catfight?

13. The pervading background of war, weapons, the US involvement, the death of Veronica’s son?

SOMETIMES ALWAYS NEVER

UK, 2018, 91 minutes, Colour.
Bill Nighy, Sam Riley, Alice Lowe, Jenny Agutter, Tim Mc Inerney.
Directed by Carl Hunter.

This brief British drama has found a sympathetic audience, an older audience, who have appreciated the Britishness but also the calm and quiet despite the disturbing elements in the screenplay.

There is a little fascination in the title, the arrangement of words. In fact, words are central to the plot of the film as well as to its tone. Scrabble is also important.

This is definitely a film for fans of Bill Nighy. He is not so idiosyncratic here, playing Alan, a tailor in a small town. He is certainly mannered – Bill Nighy always is – but he plays a man whose wife has died some years earlier, has suffered the loss of one of his sons, is still rather critical of his surviving son. As the film opens, he is meeting this son, Peter (Sam Riley) because the police have an unidentified body which maybe is missing son.

They have to stay the night at a Bed and Breakfast where they meet a couple who have also been invited to identify the body, which might be their son. Grief has affected them and they have become a rather old and bickering couple. Alan, with a touch of the conman, persuades Arthur (Tim McInerney) to make a bet on a game of Scrabble. Arthur doesn’t have a chance because of Alan’s expertise with words, specialist words, exotic words, easily wins the game. Margaret (Jenny Agutter) calls her husband a fool.

The body is not that of Alan’s son and so the grief and the search continue. Peter is in advertising, is married with a young son, but is rather morose, rarely, if ever smiling. He is shocked when he finds his father having a one night stand. His father continues to criticise him.

A lot of the dialogue refers to words and their meanings, with further games of Scrabble, and the news that Alan is playing Scrabble with someone online who uses the methods of the son who disappeared – who had disappeared, walking out in the middle of a Scrabble game – could it be?

When Alan himself disappears, Peter’s son urges him to go to find him. In fact, Peter knows exactly where to go, has a somewhat manic interlude with comedian Alexi Sayle doing his shtick, leads his father to find the identity of the online player.

A mixture of emotions, laid-back performances even in the emotions, a very British-style entertainment.

1. A British story? Universal story, family, loss? The title and its tone? The background of words, Scrabble games? – And definitions of words, itinerary… Hope?

2. The theme of lost children, the search? Trauma?

3. Family, themes of those who are not lost but neglected?

4. Bill Nighy as Alan, his age, his manner, tailor and smartly dressed, his shop? His story, his wife’s death, playing Scrabble, Michael suddenly leaving, disappearing? Producing the posters, the search for Michael over the years? His relationship with Peter, his being critical? His own home and its layout, staying with his son and family? Meeting Peter, their discussion, driving to the town, to view the body that had been found? The night at the Bed and Breakfast, quiet, meeting Margaret and Arthur, suggesting the game of Scrabble, the bet, the game, Alan and his vast knowledge? Peter’s reaction, disappearing? Going to the police station, the other couple, the body not Michael’s?

5. Peter and his work, the ice cream truck, not listening to Alan? The advertisements? His wife, his relationship with his son? His unhappiness, the son and his girlfriend? Word games?

6. Arthur and Margaret, their bickering, their son disappeared, to identify the body, Arthur and his boasting, the bet, his losing? His reputation for imitating singers?

7. Alan, the liaison with the Margaret, Peter finding her in the house? Her strong-willed stance? Her leaving, the visit again to the house, the encounter with Peter, phoning her husband, leaving, the singing?

8. The tensions at home, Alan seeming to have disappeared, Peter’s son and his concern?

9. Peter going in search, the issue of the anonymous online Scrabble player, the possibility of its being Michael? Peter and the interview with the man at the boat, the comic touch?

10. The Z, on the van, the presence passing by, Alan going in search, the hooded player – and the online player being Peter himself?

11. The reconciliation between father and son, the father at home with the family? Accepting the disappearance of Michael?

THE MAN WHO KILLED DON QUIXOTE

UK, 2018, 132 minutes, Colour.
Adam Driver, Johnson Pryce, Stellan Skarsgaard, Olga Kurylenko, Jordi Moll, Joana Ribeiro.
Directed by Terry Gilliam.

Once upon a time there was a writer-director, Terry Gilliam, a man of wild imagination, an American, cartoonist and animator, who found a home in the company of the Monty Python cast, contributing his own style to the look and tone of their television programs and films. After being successful with such cult films as Brazil and Time Bandits, having expensive and lavish flops like Baron Munchausen, bizarre portrait of Gonzo journalist, Hunter S.Thompson, Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas, he decided to make a project, The Man Who Killed Don Quixote – but what might be called you will-fortune overtook him – overbudget, filming stopping after six days, the ill-health of French actor Jean Rochefort who was playing Don Quixote, the presence of Johnny Depp.

What was salvaged out of this experience was a documentary, Lost in La Mancha, full of regrets, full of vision impossible.

But, Terry Gilliam persevered, and here is his intended film. For those looking forward to it, it is a Terry Gilliam indulgence. For some looking forward to it, it is something of a bewilderment, a blend of the real and the surreal, matter-of-fact realism and fantasy. For those who don’t know the history, either response is possible.

Adam Driver is an unusual choice to play Toby, directing a commercial in Spain inspired by Don Quixote himself. Toby is moody, pedantic, perfectionist ambitions but not quite realising them. In fact, he had made a student film 10 years earlier from Cervantes and his novel and gained a reputation because of it. In a sullen break from filming, hopping on a motorbike and intensely rushing through the Spanish countryside, he revisits the locale for his student film, discovering that his amateur actor, a cobbler, is still in the village, somewhat out of his mind, performing for visitors in a poverty-row sideshow, a performance of a somewhat demented Don Quixote.

The cobbler is played by Jonathan Pryce, an excellent choice to play Don Quixote, stealing every scene he is in, puzzled by his being chosen for the role, inept in performing, rising to energy and then becoming the Don.

In the modern background are the film boss played by Stellan Skarsgaard, Olga Lurylenko as his seeming trophy wife, an assortment of producers and publicists as well as members of the crew.

But then, Terry Gilliam’s imagination goes rather wild – and the wildness is all up there on the screen, lavish costumes and decor, a re-enactment of Cervantes story, this time Toby himself becoming Sancho Panza. The odd couple ride horses, tilt at windmills, encounter all kinds of enemies, femme fatale, Giants… But, all the time, Toby is conscious of his being himself as well as Sancho Panza, entangled with a villain, Jorda Molla, and the significance already-appearance of his original Dulcinea, the daughter of the restaurant owner, leading to religious rituals, festivities, violence, fights – and death.

What one might call a mixed bag, and, one might ask, to what purpose?

1. The title? Terry Gilliam’s earlier intended film? The background from his documentary, Lost in La Mancha?

2. Terry Gilliam, his career, cartoonist, writer and director, unlimited imagination?

3. The Spanish locations, the film set, the elaborate windmill? Modern Spain, the towns, the countryside, the bike ride, the old restaurant, Don Quixote sideshow?

4. The flashbacks, the student film, the locations, the actors? Fantasy and exotic? The musical score?

5. The opening, the filming and the tone, filming the commercial, Don Quixote and the windmill, his being caught, the cutting of the filming? The pressure from the producers? Toby, his work as a director, ultra-serious? His interactions with the crew? His moods, the clash with the producer, the publicist?

6. Toby in himself, directing the commercial his being pedantic, his inspiration from Don Quixote? Moods, budget, taking the bike, the ride? The shots of his student film?

7. The past, the shoemaker, Jonathan Pryce becoming Don Quixote? The restaurant, the waitress, the pressures from her father? The ordinary village life? The shoemaker and his rehearsals, not convincing as Don Quixote, his getting energy, the effect? The reputation of the student film?

8. The present, Toby visiting the restaurant, the conversation with Raoul, his daughter leaving and becoming a prostitute? The encounter with the old woman, the signs for Don Quixote, the shoemaker as a sideshow, his performance, mad and intelligent, his escape? Toby taking him, their beginning a strange journey through the countryside?

9. The boss, as a producer, bringing his wife, trophy wife? Toby taking care of her, the sexual encounter? But his being more interested in watching the old DVD? The trouble with the waiter in the restaurant, his being arrested?

10. The transition of the contemporary action to a world of fantasy? Spanish Holy Week? The procession, the clergy, statues and ritual, penance?

11. The shoemaker reverting to Don Quixote? Costumes, Toby becoming Sancho Panza, their riding the horses? The escapade, the behaviour, madness? The range of the fantasy, the blend of the real and the fantasy? The boss’s wife, her presence in the pageant? The return of Raoul’s daughter, her role, behaviour, significance? The identities of real-life mixed with those of the novel? The madness, the feast, the Giants? Costumes and decor?

12. The Giants, the confrontation, Don Quixote’s death? Sancho Panza’s confronting the village and the Giants? Toby confronting?

13. The purpose of this exercise of Terry Gilliam’s imagination?

AGAINST THE LAW

UK, 2017, 84 minutes, Colour.
Daniel Mays, Richard Gadd, Mark Gattis, Richard Dillane, Charlie Creed Miles.
Directed by Fergus O' Brien.

This is a brief film made for television focusing on the changes in legislation in the UK concerning homosexuality.

Daniel Mays portrays journalist Peter Wildeblood, the screenplay based on his autobiography. A lonely man, he seeks out male companions at bars, finds an RAF friend with whom he falls in love. For a 21st-century audience, the consequences may be quite surprising and this film is a reminder of the status of homosexuals and any activity, even private and consenting, was considered criminal activity.

The police are shown as being eager to arrest and convict homosexuals, Peter Wildeblood being arrested as well as some upper-class men and being tried in court. The RAF lover gives information about his relationship, especially when letters between the two are discovered, so that he will get a lighter sentence.

The film shows Wildeblood taking advice about defending himself and not admitting the truth – lying during the hearing. He is convicted and goes to jail.

However, there were movements during the mid 1950s especially with the government setting up a committee and getting its findings in the Wolfenden Report, a scene in this film showing Wildeblood giving testimony to the committee.

In fact, after 1957, it was 10 years before the legislation for decriminalisation was passed. And Peter Wildeblood had a continuing career in British television, writing and producing.

1. Issues of homosexuality and the law? In the United Kingdom? Criminal offences? The Wolfenden Report? Changes in the law in 1967? Subsequently?

2. The setting of the 1950s, homes, mansions, pubs, the streets, the courts? Prison? The musical score?

3. The autobiography of Peter Wildeblood? His assertion that he was homosexual? His background as a boy, his identity? In middle age, his work as a journalist? His loneliness, going to the bar, the conversations, the sailors, encountering Eddie, going home, the sexual encounter, the continued contact, the letters? His working for Edward Montague? He and Eddie going to the mansion, the later accusations about orgies? His arrest, the police and their not telling the truth? Out to get him?

4. Peter Wildeblood in court, with Edward Montague and his cousin? The accusations? Peter and his bewilderment? The advice to defend themselves? Not telling the truth? Eddie and his interrogation, the deal, being cross-examined in court, his admissions? Peter and his being cross-examined, his continued lying? The sentence for the three? His going to prison, life in prison, the other prisoners, the camp prisoners, friendships?

5. The interview with the governor, the session with the therapist, the explanations of the therapy, aversion therapy, photos and electric shock, being sick and lying in vomit and excrement for days? The revulsion?

6. Peter going to testify for the Wolfenden Report?

7. Peter, released from prison, going back to his writing? (And his extensive writing and producing career in television?)

8. The glimpse of Edward Montague and his associates, the discussions with Peter about Eddie? Court cases, denials?

9. Eddie, RAF, friendly, Peter thinking he was a bit dim, but enjoying that kind of relaxing friendship? The letters from both and their relationship? Peter never seeing Eddie again?

10. The importance of the testimonials from the men who lived at that time, their own stories, their memories, their stories about the relationships, closeted, coming out, the names? Their all appearing at the end – and the indication of their names and ages? The value of the giving witness and the impact of their stories on the audience?

JUANITA

2019, 90 minutes, Colour.
Alfre Woodard, Adam Beach, Ashlie Atkinson, Jordan Nia Elizabeth, Blair Underwood, Marcus Henderson, La Tanya Richardson Jackson.
Directed by Clark Johnson.

Juanita is a very plain title. The film is based on a novel by Sheila Williams, Dancing on the Edge of the Roof – far more imaginative!

The film is a portrait of an African American woman, an interesting device for the opening credits with animated sketches illustrating her life, its developments, failures, building up to the present situation where she is in middle age. She is Juanita, played by Alfre Woodard – with the device of her addressing the audience throughout the film, confiding in them.

She lives in Columbus, Ohio, lives by herself except that she has three children, by different fathers, one of whom is in prison, one of whom is irresponsible, and the daughter who lives a casual life, moving in and out of home, a boyfriend. While Juanita has friends, she is becoming more and more exasperated and decides to go on a journey, giving herself an opportunity to find her real self.

Juanita then becomes a road film, Juanita buying a ticket to Butte, Montana (which she pronounces, ‘butt’). She is very tired – but has an imaginative moment when she sees the bus passengers singing and dancing with her. But, at a stop, she encounters a truck driver, Peaches (Ashlie Atkinson) who offers her a lift.

She does not get to Butte, but stops at Paper Moon, clashing with Jess (Adam Beech), a Native American who has served in the Gulf War and still suffers from trauma even as he tries to make his diner a modern French cuisine. Juanita bonds well with Jess, working in the diner, accompanying him to a gathering of Native Americans, disturbed at first, but then at ease.

While the film has a focus on African-Americans? and Native Americans, it has a universal story, a middle-aged woman realising that life has been hard, that she is tired and exasperated – and needs to go on a journey, even a physical journey as well as emotional, to discover her real self.

1. The title? The focus on Juanita?

2. The initial sketches, their style, humour, building up Juanita’s life and dilemmas?

3. A piece of Americana, race issues, women’s issues, crime?

4. Columbus, Ohio? Homes, streets, workplaces, prison? And for Juanita a place to get out from? The musical score?

5. Juanita, Alfre Woodard and her screen presence, the dialogue and talking to camera and confiding in the audience? Her age, family background, the men in her life, fathers of her children, her relationship with her children? The responsible children at home? Her son in prison and a visit to him?

6. Her decision to leave, her friend and confiding in her? The later phone calls?

7. Juanita and her fantasies, her dreams, the presence of Blair Underwood, the sex symbol, his sending himself up? Romance, yet his being self-centred, wanting the loan? His continual reappearance – and her finally ridding herself of him?

8. Going to the bus station, wanting to go to Butte and her pronunciation? On the bus, the ride, the escape, the effect? Her imagining the passengers and their singing and dancing?

9. The stop, at the diner, the encounter with Peaches, their discussion, deciding to go with her, in the truck, the trip, arriving at Paper Moon?

10. The diner, wanting the old-fashioned breakfast, the French cuisine at the diner, her encounter with Jess, the discussions about food? Differences? His inviting her to the kitchen, making the breakfast? His attraction, driving her to the boarding house? Giving her the job, the collage of her cooking, the increasing customers?

11. Jess, his life, the Gulf War, witnessing the death of friends? The traumatic effect on him and his later life?

12. The invitation to Juanita to go to the Native American gathering, the people, the traditions, the rituals, the camaraderie? Her experience, her being sick, recovering, the effect of the visit?

13. The phone calls, her children and their responsibilities, irresponsibility?

14. Her son arriving from prison, parole, Jess urging him to come? The son working in the restaurant?

15. Juanita, the effect of the experience, a new lease of life, the future, Jess?

TRIPLE FRONTIER

US, 2019, 125 minutes, Colour.
Ben Affleck, Oscar Isaac, Charlie Hunnam, Garrett Hedlund, Pedro Pascal, Adria Arjona.
Directed by J.C.Chandor.

Triple Frontier is a Netflix film, an action adventure. It also raises moral issues about illegal money, stashes, robberies, killings to save the money.

The film was cowritten by Mark Boal who wrote In the Valley of Elah, and Kathryn Bigelow’s films, Zero Dark Thirty, Hurt Locker, Detroit. The director also contributed to the screenplay – and his films are quite varied, financing Margin Call, Robert Redford at sea in All is Lost, Oscar Isaac in The Most Violent Year.

This is very much a male adventure, opening with a pep talk from Charlie Hunnam for military recruits, followed by an operation in Latin America, a siege, led by Oscar Isaac. It then moves on to a plan for a robbery in Brazil, a drug lord and his remote house, allegedly having a safe, but the group discovering that a vast amount of cash in notes was hidden behind the walls of the house.

Joining Isaac and Hunnam are other experts, Ben Affleck down on his luck after military service as a real estate agent, Garrett Hedlund as a cage fighter, Pedro Pascal as a retired helicopter pilot. They are all recruited for the operation and the film spends quite some time on the actual robbery, the break-in plans, shooting of guards, setting the house on fire. The rest of the film has the journey with the money, becoming evermore burdensome and heavy, their having to let go so much of it – too heavy for a helicopter crossing of the Andes, too heavy for them to carry, using some of the cash to light a fire to warm them in the snow, a crash landing and confrontation with local farmers…

There are some reflections on the plan, the scheme, the aims as well as the violence that has ensued in their escape. There are some moments of redemption at the end in the decision as to what to do with the money – though there is a tongue-in-cheek postscript when Hunnam gives to Isaac the coordinates of where the bulk of the money was discarded.

1. The title? Countries and borders? Action adventure?

2. Locations, Latin America, military action, the robbery, the trek and escape, the Andes, Peru, the coast? Military headquarters and special Ops? The musical score?

3. The prologue, Ironhead and his lecture, morale boosting for the military? The transition to Pope, the helicopter flight, the military moving in, the siege in the town, shooting, explosives, the girl and Pope’s pursuit? His contact with his girlfriend? The information about the house, the money?

4. Pope, his character, his friends and past action? His going to see Tom, giving him the information and the plan, his daughter in the truck? His going to see Ironhead, listening to his talk, offering him the plan? The discussions with Catfish, his skill as a pilot? The group going to see Ben Miller, the cage fight? Their all agreeing to participate?

5. The plan, the detail, the information, the reliance on the young woman and the description of the house interior, film? Passports? The issues of the law, illegal action or not? The military background and its use? The helicopter, their getting into Brazil, going to the house, scouting it out, the information, the family going to church? The guards?

6. The operation, no safe, the realisation that the house itself was a safe, breaking down the walls, the amount of money? Gathering it, bagging it? Too much? The return of the family, being held up by the woman? And the shooting of the guards? Burning the house and the money? The escape? The plane, the contact, bringing the helicopter, Catfish flying it?

7. The moral issues, the money, illegal, robbing it, aims for its use? The beginning of the killings and shootings? The experience in the village, shooting the farmers? The deal with the old farmer, the money, the mules? Seeing the young man in the village, Is Pursuing them and killing Tom?

8. The helicopter flight, the weight, getting over the Andes, leaving a lot of the money, the engine, the crash landing? The confrontation with the locals in the fields, shooting, the suspicions? Getting the mules, carrying the money?

9. The money as a continuing burden, letting it go, the mule and the money over the cliff, the notes scattering in the wind? Burning the money to keep warm? The shootings, the defence, Tom’s death? Carrying his body? Throwing the money into the crevasse? Carrying the rest in their sacks, yet still a lot of money?

10. The attack, the going by foot, in the dark, through the river, the information about the young people waiting for them, military? Their taking the car, the crashes, along the beach?

11. Miller, going to the boat, bringing the launch, the rescue?

12. The portrait of the characters, Pope and his leadership, concerns? Tom, ruthless with the killings? Catfish and his skills, yet becoming more vicious, wanting the others to shoot and kill? Ben Miller, his moods?

13. The money, the final decision, the trust fund for Tom’s family, the giving up? The affectionate farewells?

14. The irony, Ironhead having all the coordinates for where they left the piled money!

CABIN FEVER

US, 2016, 99 minutes, Colour.
Gage Golightly, Matthew Daddario, Samuel Davis, Nadine Crocker, Dustin Ingram, Randy Schulman, George Griffith, Louise Linton, Laura Kenny.
Directed by Travis Z (Travis Zariwny).

Cabin Fever was originally a successful horror film of 2002, written and directed by Eli Roth who was emerging as a popular director of horror films, leading to Hostel. The film is about five young adults going into the country for a vacation, encountering strange experiences including a biting boy, a hermit who had been infected, hostile locals. Gradually, the visitors are also infected. Interestingly, there is no suggestion of anything supernatural about the plot.

Fans of the original were not impressed by this decision to remake the film, very much in the manner of the original, though some reversal of characters in shots and size of shots – reminiscent of Gus Van Sant and his decision to remake Psycho.

This is familiar material going back, at least, to the original Friday the 13th and imitated many times afterwards. While there is an eeire atmosphere, the puzzle of the boy biting, the hostility of the locals, the scene of the hermit discovering his infected dog and himself being infected, his confronting one of the young people in the woods, knocking on the door for help and his being rejected, shot at, eventually consumed by fire, the main characters themselves are rather unsympathetic. There is the pairing off, a couple of sex scenes for indulgence, some friendships, some hostilities, quite some bickering, difficulties in coping, and encounter with a rather strange deputy with her eye on one of the female victims, a lady slaughtering a hog and upset about the infection…

For those who have not seen the original, it probably passes as a horror entertainment, though very much at this stage in a familiar vein.

REMINGTON AND THE CURSE OF THE ZOMBADINGS


Philippines, 2011, 96 minutes, Colour.
Martin Escudero, Lauren Young, Kirby Zamora.
Directed by Jade Castro.

One would not be expecting a masterpiece when reading the title of this film.

However, it is set in a Filipino village, something of a fantasy, something of a drama – with some comic touches.

There is little boy in the village who goes around, playing pranks, very cheeky, calling out to most of the men in the village that they are ‘Bakli’, ‘Homos’, in fact, there do seem to quite a lot of homosexuals in the village. He also shouts at the parish priest, sitting in his confessional – and who is very embarrassed about being outed. The little boy taunts a Drag Queen in the cemetery – and is cursed that he will become homosexual when he grows up.

The film is a sometimes raucous attack on homophobia.

When Remington grows up, he mixes with a group of young people his own age, especially Jigs who drives a local taxi. He becomes infatuated with Hannah when she returns home from college to be with her father.

While this romantic theme is the background of the film, the curse comes into effect. Remington begins to assume the manner, very camp, a local gay men. He wears different clothes, speaks in a different manner, behaves with what can be seen as a kind of parody of the camp style. There is also a complication with Jigs and some homoeroticism.

However, they all go to seek out the Drag Queen so that the curse might be lifted. In the meantime, there is somebody going around the village killing off all the gays (including the priest who makes a reappearance), with a scientific breakthrough taser called a ‘gaydar’ which detects (and outs) homosexuals, killing them.

Much of the action is corny, especially when the dead start to rise again and we have a Filipino version of a zombie film – but all in the context of gays, anti-homophobia, parody.

Martin Escudero does quite a good job of combining touches of a macho young man with his moments of camp exaggeration.

A curiosity item!

THE SISTERS BROTHERS

France, 2018, 122 minutes, Colour.
John C.Reilly, Joaquin Phoenix, Jake Gylenhaal, Riz Ahmed, Rebecca Root, Alison Tolman, Rutger Hauer, Carol Kane.
Directed by Jacques Audiard.

This is a Western with a difference – and not just only in the ambiguously arresting title! The central characters are brothers, but the family name happens to be Sisters.

French director, Jacques Audiard, who has made some striking films, The Beat My Heart Skipped, the prison drama, The Prophet, and Rust and Bone, travels to the American West, an adaptation of a novel by Patrick De Witt.

Audiard seems to have something of a mythological view of the West by the landscapes, the gunslingers, the prospectors, the makeshift towns, but is also looking at it with realistic eyes and camera, especially the violence and the lawlessness.

The setting is Oregon in the early 1850s, the era of the gold rushes.

And, who are the Sisters Brothers? The older is Eli, played in his solid even if familiar way, by John C. Reilly. The younger brother is Charlie, erratic in his attitudes and behaviour, another such role by Joaquin Phoenix. They have resented their father and are under the employ of the self-styled Commodore, Rutger Hauer, a man of power, thug associates and sending the Brothers out on ‘missions’. The audience sees, right before the credits, the violence in action, darkness, the fire of smoking guns, brutal deaths.

Quite a lot of the film concerns the interactions between the two brothers. Eli has a sense of responsibility, is protective of his younger brother, even if exasperated by much of his behaviour, especially his drinking, his love for violence and shooting. They travel the west on their missions, stopping in towns, Charlie getting drunk and spending the nights with prostitutes, Eli more romantic and sentimental, wanting to relive an episode where a woman he loved gave him the gift of a shawl.

But, they also cause quite a lot of mayhem, especially in a town called Mayfield, called after the tough woman who established it – and their partly destroy her and the town.

The central mission concerns an associate, John Morris, played by Jake Gylenhaal. He is also on a mission from the Commodore, tracking down a man who is not only a gold prospector but who has developed a formula whereby a liquid poured into the river will make the gold shine out and be easily picked up. He is played by Riz Ahmed – a more sympathetic character, caught up in his invention and eager to test it, befriending John Morris after initial enmity, and with the dream of going to a community in Texas which believes in justice and peace.

The Brothers, of course, do find Morris and the inventor – but, the screenplay takes some different turns from what we might have expected, making it all the more interesting. These turns naturally involve quite an amount of violence, more deaths, some confrontations – but an unexpected ending and the introduction of the Brothers’ Mother (a chance to see veteran actress, Carol Kane).

The director won the Silver Lion in Venice, 2018. The film had nominations and wins in the annual French awards, the Cesars and the Lumieres.

So, this is how a Frenchman interprets the West.

1. The title, the tone, playful and ironic?

2. The Oregon settings, the middle of the 19th century, the American West coast, the world of the gunfighters, prospectus, towns, the countryside, the rivers and gold? The musical score?

3. A French director, his perspective? Picture of the West?

4. The introduction, the location, the shootouts? The introduction to the two brothers, the shooting and they’re being merciless?

5. , Older, thoughtful, taking responsibility? Charlie, younger, shooting, drinking, irresponsible?

6. The Commodore, his control, plans, missions? The formula for the prospecting? The range of shooters and the Commodores entourage, loyalty? Charlie taking on the mission? The widespread influence of the Commodore, eventually Charlie wanting to take over, arrival back, the Commodore dead, you like punching him to make sure?

7. The mission, the explanation, the formula, Warm and the Commodore wanting it? John Morris, working for the Commodore, his writing down his story, his mission? Seeking out Warm? Finding him, their talk, tying each other up, the bonding and friendship, prospecting, the vision of the equal society in Texas?

8. The brothers, their quest, in Mayfield, the search? Mayfield herself, the town, influence? The drinking, the dancing? The buildup to the confrontation, questions, Mayfield the death, their leaving the town? Charlie and the women Western Mark

9. the prostitute and wanting her to re-enact the episode with the shawl? Her warnings?

10. Continuing to travel, the bonds between the two, memories of their father and his death, the quarrels,

11. upset, Charlie and his drinking punching his brother?

12. Finding Morris and Warm, the confrontation, the reactions? The horses and the travel? The river, camping?

13. Settling down to prospect for gold, Charlie and his change, more human, talking, enquiry about Texas?

14. The gold?

15. John and warm, the test, Charlie and his reaction, the formula, the schooling, John Morrison the injuries, his death?

16. , His death?

17. The return, going to the Commodore, finding him dead?

18. The desire to go home, the memories of their father and the story, meeting their mother, settling down?

MAKING MONTGOMERY CLIFT

US, 2019, 88 minutes, Colour/black and white.
Directed by Robert Clift and Hillary Demmon.

Montgomery Clift is not such a well-known cinema-figure in the 21st-century. Those who admire his films in the 1940s and 1950s, especially, will value this documentary. After his death, he became something of a classic gay icon, gaining him a new following which persists, including this documentary.

There is a certain amount of biographical information in this film, his family background – although, it comes as something of a shock for those who did not know, he had a twin sister of whom there is no mention here, her family not wanting to collaborate with the film – his precocious ability as a young actor, having great success on stage for many years rather than moving into film.

It was known that he was a gay man and there is discussion about his relationships and behaviour, both closeted and open.

From 1947 to 1956, he starred in several significant films, beginning with John Wayne (something of his antithesis) in Red River and The Search. Other significant films included The Heiress, A Place in the Sun, I Confess, From Here to Eternity. During the making of Raintree County, he suffered severe injuries in a car crash, especially injuries to his face with a comment that this would lead to his withdrawing from filmmaking as well as his growing dependence on alcohol and drugs.

However, it is pointed out that he made as many films after the accident as he did before, a lot of attention in this film beating given to The Young Lions and The Misfits and his reason for taking the subordinate role in Judgement at Nuremberg, which led to an Oscar nomination. There is also discussion about his role as Freud in John Huston’s film and a subsequent law case, Huston’s complaint about Cliff harming the film – with the information that actually Clift won the case.

The important thing about this film is that it is been made by his nephew, Robert Clift, collaborating with his wife. Clift’s intention was to follow through on the popular reputation that Clift had as indicated above, but make the point that there was far more to Clift than this “tragic� image. He uses a great deal of home movie material of Clift when young, during the 1950s, a picture of the ordinary Clift, often playful man, but who took his career very seriously, his choice of films, working on the dialogue with directors…

And the source of Clift’s reinterpretation is the discovery of a number of audio tapes made by his father, Brooks Clift, many of which are reproduced in this film, reinforcing the interpretation that there was much more to Clift. There is a critique of the initial biography by Robert LaGuardia? which popularised the tragic interpretation. And there are many interviews with the subsequent biographer, Patricia Bosworth (who had also hoped that there would be a film made about Clift but it never eventuated).

So, this is a most interesting film for film buffs, clips, conversations about the films (though, surprisingly, a number of films not mentioned, including Suddenly, Last Summer, Lonelyhearts and Wild River). And, unsurprisingly, this documentary had quite some circulation in festivals of Queer Films.