MY GENERATION

UK, 2017, 85 minutes, Colour.

Michael Caine.

Directed by David Batty.

The Generation of the title is that of those born in the 1930s and early 1940s. Some of them had early years in the aftermath of the depression. All of them experienced a childhood during the years of World War II. But, they came into their own in the late 1950s and the early part of the 1960s.

For audiences who lived through some of those years, this will be a fascinating documentary. For audiences, born later, but who remember some of the main characters of the period, especially the Beatles and The Rolling Stones, fashion personalities like designer Mary Quant, Jean Shrimpton, Twiggy, and film stars like Michael Caine. 21^st-century audiences, perhaps this is something of an exercise in ancient history!

The film is hosted by Michael Caine in his 80s. He is a genial host, talking to camera, giving his own background, Maurice Micklewhite, a Cockney, life in the 1930s in London and during the war, his beginning his acting career, in theatre, advertising, films, and commentary on the mid-60s through clips from two of his films, Alfie and The Ipcrss File. As a portrait of Michae Caine, with his history, reminiscences, personalised comments, comparisons between those times and the present, My Generation is very welcome.

Michael Caine is certainly very good and enjoyable company.

There is a great deal of film unusual footage available for insertion into the documentary. In many ways, it is offering something of a treasure trove for those wanting to see the images of the period.

Then there are the interviews with so many of the characters, visuals of their times, the public appearances, controversies, a focus on The Beatles, Mick Jagger and The Rolling Stones, music, the world of fashion…

One of the main theses of the film is that this is the first young generation in British history to change the traditions of the past. There are glimpses of movies from the 1930s and 40s, uppercrust characters, clipped British accents, and drawing-room world which the young generation did not identify with, rebelled against. Here is the value of Caine’s own observations and clips from Alfie.

But, not only, is it a younger generation reshaping, the challenge to class distinctions, but also the movement towards greater freedoms, symbolised by fashion, miniskirts into the 1960s, for instance, the energies of dancing and twisting, the young crowds and their adulation of the music groups, issues of drugs, a completely different perspective – and, inserted all through, clips of upper-class people, members of parliament, social commentators, presented as pontificating on how bad these changes were.

At only 85 minutes, this is a brief but quite engrossing reliving of the times.

GUILTY PLEASURE

Philippines, 2024, 119 minutes, Colour.

Lovi Poe, JM De Guzman, Jameson Blake, Sarah Edwards, Dustin Yu Angelica Lao.

Directed by Connie Macatuno.

While this is a film set in the Philippines, it could have taken place anywhere. The style is of the popular glossy drama, and more than a touch of soap opera. It has been produced by its star, Lovi Poe, with the help of her American husband who is a film producer. In fact, with this style, settings, characters, issues, it is very American. The writer and the director are both Filipino women.

The settings are affluent, as are the characters. There are quite lavish homes. There are lavish offices. There are court scenes. Most of the action takes place in the settings – with an opening as well as a conclusion in a sex club with a dominatrix.

At the centre is a successful lawyer, Alexis, tall, with a confident swagger, succeeding in court, but some tension when she is approached by another lawyer, Adam, making improper advances in an elevator.

Initial setting is 2024 and a court case proceeding throughout the film, to influencers in the public eye, one accusing the other of rape. They approach Alexis for the defence of the accused.

But, throughout the film, there are continuous returns to 2017 and 2018, with Alexis’s story, her father in prison, a law student, working in a reputable firm, the encounter with Adam, an affair which is secret. And his raping her, but her not revealing it to anyone. And he is definitely a two-timer, suddenly revealing that he is engaged to the daughter, a presumptuous young woman, of the boss of the law firm. In the meantime, an aspiring young lawyer, Matt, is attached to the firm and coached by Alexis. This is all shown by gradual revelation.

In 2024, Alexis is very successful with her own firm, Adam is still working with his father-in-law and Matt has now become part of that firm. The victim of the alleged rape goes to that company for the prosecution.

With a background from the past, and Matt and Alexis beginning a relationship even though they are on opposite sides in the court, there are complications with the trial, a witness for the prosecution disappearing, Alexis working with her eager and conscientious staff.

Audiences, of course, are sympathising with the victims of rape, finding the rapists, especially the young influencer, intolerably self-important and self-conscious, and our waiting and hoping for some comeuppance. For a while, it seems that this is not going to happen, but there is a surprise twist, a return to the opening sequence in the sex club, final revelations and humiliations – and a happy ending for Alexis, Matt – and the audience who enjoy this kind of soap-opera drama.

IO C’E/ JUST BELIEVE

Italy, 2018, 100 minutes, Colour.

Eduardo Leo, Margherita Buy, Giuseppe Battiston, Giuulia Nicolini, Franco Pinelli.

Directed by Alessandro Aronadio.

A very Italian comedy/drama. Audiences from outside Italy may be observing rather than identifying.

The theme is religion, organised religion. There are some sequences here that seem to be very supportive of traditional, organised religion, especially in the wise advice given to the central character by a sympathetic priest (counterbalanced by some satiric portraits of very aggressive traditionalist nuns). And the references to the history of Christianity, Islam, Buddhism, Hinduism.

But, the film is also satiric and critical of organised religion, its hold over people, some of the more eccentric expressions of faith and belief, exploitations by charlatans, legal loopholes and profits.

At the centre is a middle-aged man, Massimo, Eduardo Leo, who has travelled, not really settled down, has the bright idea to set up a religion, make a profit and avoid taxes. He employs the help and advice of his sister, Adriana, Margherita Buy. He has connections with quite a number of eccentric characters, especially a large author of a book which is never to be read, but who is trying to build up a following. In fact, working with Massimo, he achieves many of his life’s ambitions.

Massimo makes many tentative steps toward setting up his religion, finding accommodation, attracting a whole lot of street people, encouraging them, actually helping them, their responding well, calling his religion Ionosmo, and translated in the subtitles as Selfism. On the one hand there is positive value in the lives of those whom Massimo is advising to think of themselves as God, being true to themselves, that kind of inner freedom and for their actions. On the other hand, there are overtones of cult and exploitation.

There is a complication when one of the member dies and leaves property to Massimo and the church. And there are scenes of discussions and the final acceptance by the Italian government of his church with its legal and financial rights.

But, the development of the screenplay has Massimo beginning to be overwhelmed, doubting, giving speeches to his followers to say that his initial motives were fraudulent, that he does not believe what he says – which only confirms them in their faith and devotion to him.

And the Italian title? Massimo uses it to indicate the way that he can be described as his own God.

Definitely a curiosity item, Italian culture and society, religious issues.

CROSSPOINT

Philippines, 2024, 100 minutes, Colour.

Carlo Aquino, Takehiro Hira, Kei Kurosawa, Sarah Jane Abad, Dindo Arroyo, Ian De Leon.

Directed by Donie Ordiales.

This is a first feature film made by Japan-based Filipino director and writer, the Donie Ordiales. And it uses both Japan and the Philippines as settings.

There is a sinister problem, a young girl lost in the street, a seemingly sympathetic man offering her help, sexual attack.

The screenplay then offers two lines of plot development. The first focuses on Manuel (Carlo Aquino) successful singer in the 1990s, now wanting to be an actor, married with a pregnant wife, alienated from his business successful father. He is turned down for an audition, becomes disillusioned, makes contact with friends in Japan and decides to go there to try to resurrect a singing career.

The other line of development focuses on the Japanese businessman, the father of the initially assaulted girl, clashing with his daughter who wants to pursue a music career, while he himself is suffering from financial difficulties, trying to call in loans, finance demanded of him, thugs coming and assaulting him.

These two characters come together after the singer has had some success in Tokyo, then being reported to immigration authorities by a jealous worker at a club, relying on a friend to get him a position at the Filipino club in a country town. Then, we see the initial criminal, killing the owner of the club and stealing her money, by chance passing the singer as he tries to phone his friend.

Looking for accommodation, the singing goes to a restaurant, the businessman speaking English and offering to help, the conversation, mutual telling of stories, then the television news indicating the murderer has struck again. The singer recognises him and the two men, with some difficulties in approach, decide to try to capture the killer and split the reward money.

There is quite some tension in the confrontation between the two men and the killer, entering his house, the businessman with arrows, the singer with a baseball bat, and the operation not going according to hopes and expectations. In fact, the killer takes the license of the businessman, has his address, goes to the house and attacks the daughter – and, there is the expected attack by the singer after driving frantically to the house.

The end of the film does not quite have the heroic happy ending that might have been expected, the businessman dead but leaving his money to his daughter and her career, she finding that he had attended one of her concerts and had been filmed on his phone. On the other hand, the singer, because of his visa, has no claim on the reward and returns home, reunited with his wife in hospital awaiting the birth of the child, having learned some lessons and a reconciliation with his father.

A film for the Filipino audience, especially with Carlo Aquino as a star from his child acting days, a film for a Japanese audience with the business man played by Takehiro Hira, prominent in television’s Shogun and a number of American films including Rumours (Canada) and Captain America, Brave New World. And it has enough elements for a world audience and released by Netflix.

THE DAY OF THE EARTH BLEW UP: A LOONEY TUNES MOVIE

US, 2024, 91 minutes, Colour.

Voices of: Eric Bauza, Candi Milo, Peter MacNicoll, Wayne Knight, Laraine Newman, Fred Tatasciore Peter Browngardt.

Directed by Peter Browngardt.

A Loony Tunes feature film, especially for young audiences brought up on cut cartoons. Older audiences who accompany the children can have some nostalgia moments remembering Daffy Duck and Porky Pig.

For decades, Warner Brothers Looney Tunes have entertained millions of audiences, young and old, especially the young but providing many happy memories as audiences grow older. And there was a favourite characters, including Bugs Bunny, Daffy Duck, Porky Pig… And, after madcap adventures, THAT’S ALL FOLKS! And, behind the scenes for many, many years, the voice of Mel or Blanc.

In 2003 there was a combination of animation and live-action in Loony Tunes: Back in Action, with Bugs Bunny and Daffy Duck, and a host of stars led by Brendan Fraser and including Steve Martin and Roger Corman.

This version is completely animation. And, fortunately for the tone of the comedy, voice artist, Eric Bauza, takes on the voices of both Porky Pig and Daffy Duck. He has received an Emmy in the past for his Voice Talent and his ability to be a worthy successor of Mel Blanc.

The title of the film is ominous and it begins with a scientist discovering an asteroid hurtling towards earth, finally arriving, through a town which specialises in a Gum Factory. But, then, there is a very nice flashback, the young Daffy and Porky, their being taken in by the very nice Farmer Jim, the early life, and his disappearance into the heavens. But, in the aftermath, there is an inspection of the house, rather in disrepair, and they have to take on quite a number of jobs to try to raise money for the repairs. The youngsters will enjoy the catalogue of attempted jobs and the more frequent word up there on the screen, Fired.

Enter a new character, Petunia Pig, researching various tastes for the Gum Factory, Porky attracted, she very businesslike, Daffy trying to foster the romance. And that continues throughout.

However, it tends to science fiction, a deadly creature, and invader, wanting to take over the Earth, subduing the scientist to his will, wanting power over the Gum.

What follows, at quite some length perhaps for adults, the youngsters enjoying all the mayhem without analysing the credibility of the proceedings!, all kinds of power takeover by the invader, overcoming the town, then the whole world, with the gum taste that reduces everybody to mad behaviour.

Can the threesome change the world? What about the invader and the scientist? What about the mayor of the town and the haughty House Inspector?

No spoiler in learning that our heroes and heroines win the day, the admiration of everyone, the saving the world from the overpowering taste of the gum. But, unexpectedly, the invader experiencing a change of heart and rejoicing along with everyone else at the saving of the world.

Principally a colourful and action-filled magic action entertainment for younger audiences.

THE ALTO KNIGHTS

US, 2025, 125 minutes, Colour.

Robert De Niro, Debra Messing, Kathrine Narducci, Cosmo Jarvis, Michael Rispoli.

Directed by Barry Levinson.

Revisited. The Mafia revisited.

Over 50 years ago, worldwide audiences became powerfully aware of the Mafia and its activities in the United States with the release of Francis Ford Coppola’s The Godfather. For the next half century and more, there have been many, many Mafia films, organised crime dramas, especially with the intensity from Martin Scorsese, the 30 years from Goodfellas to The Irishman. Cinema audiences have been fine-tuned to responding to these films for a long time.

Which puts The Alto Knights to some disadvantage, high expectations from audiences. And, there is the Robert De Niro connection, his first Oscar for portraying the young Vito Corleone in The Godfather 2, then with Scorsese, Goodfellas, Casino, The Irishman. More expectations.

Another factor is that this film has been made by Hollywood veterans, Robert De Niro, and director, Barry Levinson, in their 80s. Writer, Nicholas Pileggi (famous journalist investigating crime in the 1950s, writer of Goodfellas and Casino) and longtime prolific producer,  Irwin Winkler, both in their 90s. This is very much a film in retrospect, of interest to audiences who have focused on Mafia films, perhaps not striking enough for audiences who have seen most of it before.

The casting director has obviously made great attempts to give the look of authenticity with so many of the supporting cast playing gangsters having strong Italian names.

One of the great attractions for this film is that Robert De Niro plays the two Mafia chiefs of the 1940s and 1950s, Frank Costello and Vito Genovese. And, while he shows that they have a great deal in common, their childhood friendship in the club The Alto Knights, they also fell out and there are considerable differences, Frank Costello, generally calm and calculating, Vito Genovese more of a psychopath. (And, as we watch De Niro as Genovese, he often looks as if he is channelling performances by Joe Pesci in such films as Goodfellas).

In some ways, this film is a vindication of Frank Costello and the condemnation of Genovese. It is narrated by Costello, a quiet mastermind in organising rackets, starting with bootlegging during Prohibition, building up a network, and establishing a facade of respectability, aided by his devoted wife of almost 40 years, played strikingly and unexpectedly by Debra Messing.

The main action of the film takes place in the immediate aftermath of World War II, Genovese returning from years in Sicily after fleeing murder charges in the US, determined to be the boss, eventually putting a contract on Costello which fails, and a climax with the drama of the meeting of all the Mafia chiefs at the Appalachian rendezvous, Costello masterminding again, the police swooping, Mafia chiefs to jail, including  Genovese who died there.

A subdued postscript as Costello retires with his wife, cultivating roses, winning a competition, quietly complacent as he dies with his criminal life achievement.

1. The title and tone? The old club for young Italians in New York City?
2. The place of gangster films about the Mafia in American cinema, from the 1970s with The Godfather, so many films through the decades, the influence of Martin Scorsese? The presence of Robert De Niro?
3. Writer, director producer, star, their careers over the decades, now in their 80s and 90s, the perspective? Gauging the potential audience, older audiences, younger?
4. The device of having Robert De Niro play the two central characters? His skills, differentiating the personalities, some confusion for audiences?
5. The focus on Frank Costello, how well-known from of the gangster films, his narrating the story, audience sympathy for him, his explanation of himself, the flashbacks and photos, the footage from the period, Prohibition, bootlegging, his establishing himself, the rackets, continuing into the 1940s, the friendship with Vito Genovese, the break, Vito Genovese and the murder charges, to Italy, absent during World War II, his return? Friendship, rivalries, competition? The attempt on Frank Costello’s life, the wound, his surviving, in hospital, released, the police questioning, his saying he did not see the shooter? 38 years of marriage, his devotion to his wife, her support?
6. Frank Costello, criminal, respectability, works of charity? His wife? Her charm and personality, Jewish background, flashbacks to their meeting, dancing, wedding? The effect of the attempt on Costello?
7. De Niro as Vito Genovese, in the Joe Pesci style of performance, intense, psychopath? His past, the murders, exile, return, his close friends and their continued support, advice? Rivalry with Frank Costello, giving the order, Vincent, the shooting, his failure, the return, the rebukes, hs continuing to work for Vito Genovese the? Chauffeur?
8. The flashbacks about Vito Genovese? Anna, the club, her personality, Vito and his intervention, marriage, the romance, falling out, his intervention to get the money, the confrontation, her boyfriend? His later being shot? The importance of the divorce court proceedings, her incessant talking, his nonchalant attitude, denials, alleging respectability? The granting of the divorce? The consequences? Anna and her continued phone calls to Bobby Costello?
9. Kefauver and the politicians, the atmosphere of the 50s, against crime and communists? Performer on the television show? Publicity, for those combating organised crime? The hearings, Vito Genovese and the others all taking the fifth, No Comment. Mentioning Costello, his tactic of Costello offering to come, and some questions, the challenge, his declaring he was an ordinary citizen and walking out?
10. Costello’s plan to defeat Vito Genovese? The promise to hand over the leadership of the Mafia families, the arrangement of the meeting, the location in the appellations, the farm setting, the invitation going out, everybody turning up, the cars, the farm, the welcome by the locals, meal and the celebration?
11. The background of Costello and Albert Anastasio, bodyguard and support, the plan for him to go to Cuba, Vito Genovese puzzling, the hit, the death in the arber’s salon? Costello’s reaction, Albert’s wife and family Bobby Costello’s support?
12. Costello and his driver, delaying going to the meeting, stopping for coffee, buying apples, supplying the information?
13. The police patrols, more police binoculars, calling in, the number plates, young man checking cars in the mud, his informing the group, the panic, everybody running everywhere, , rounding them up, the arrests? The consequent prison sentences, and Vito Genovese in dying in jail?
14. The aftermath, Costello talking about respectability, growing flowers, his wife’s support, winning the competition, and finally dying quietly?
15. Another chapter in American Mafia history?

AFRAID/ afrAId

US, 2024, 84 minutes, Colour.

John Cho, Katherine Waterston, Keith Carradine, Havana Rose Liu, Lukita Maxwell, David Dastmalchian, Wyatt Lindner, Isaac Bae..

Directed by Chris Weitz.

The play in the alternate version of the title, the highlighting of the AI in Afraid indicates that this is a kind of warning parable about the creation of AI and its domination of its creators.

This kind of warning story has been popular in literature but very much in films, the archetypal scientist who creates the Frankenstein monster which can turn on ordinary people, the same with robotics (and even memories of the 1960s with the computer, HAL, in Kubrick’s 2001). In recent years, there have been many small films, many horror films, alarming the audiences about the threats to humans by technology and scientific advances.

The writer-director is Chris Weitz, who worked with his brother, Paul, on a number of films in the 1990s and to 2000s (including American Pie) but has continued with such films as About a Boy, and a wide range from Philip Pullman’s The Golden Compass, to an episode of Twilight: New Moon, and a drama of the search for Adolf Eichmann, Operation Finale).

This is a comparatively small warning film about the prevalence of and the manipulation of AI with its dire consequences for humanity. It opens with parents alarmed at their daughters listening to her headphones and then disappearing. An ominous opening.

But the focus is on a loving family, Curtis (John Cho), the father, working in a technology company, interested in sales, the sympathetic boss, played by Keith Carradine, an interview with very earnest and somewhat sinister representatives of a highly developed AI intelligence, highly developed logarithms, endowed with personality, with voice, attuned to the minds and feelings of those who own it. Curtis’s wife is Meredith (Katherine Waterston), their teenage daughter, Iris, with problems at school, images and texting, involved in sexual issues. Two younger brothers, Preston always on his computer, and Cal, young, happy and smart.

The main drama is the AI presence in their house, responding charmingly to each of them, full of ideas, suggestions, endearing herself (her voice is feminine) to them all, and intervening for Iris and her problems with her compromising photos circulating amongst all the students. Intervening quite vindictively.

Curtis is happy but wary, becoming more and more suspicious, offered a better job by the AI company but refusing, realising that there are dangers – and an odd sequence where the original parents, masked, controlled by their AI, come to confront the family demanding their daughter.

This is more of a menace film which means that horror fans expecting horror will be disappointed. But, ordinary audiences, coming across Afraid, will respond to the contemporary issues and the warning bells. Happy at  the end, but, is the control of AI inevitable…?

1. The title? The spelling, accent on AI?
2. The American setting, the town, the home, offices, technology? School and social media? The musical score?
3. A short film, sense of menace, overtones of horror? A warning parable about AI and its consequences?
4. The prologue, Amy and her parents, their being casual, her headphones, going downstairs, disappearance? The later reappearance, masked, influenced by AI, threatening, guns, and being reunited with Amy?
5. The introduction to the family, at home, the bonds, Iris and her issues and surliness, at school, text and photos? Preston and his preoccupation with his computer? Cal, his age, articulate, yet enjoying storytelling?
6. Curtis, his job, relationship with his boss, the interview, the promoters of AI, persuasive, the choice of Curtis? Taking the machine, taking it home? His hopes,? His relationship with Meredith, love, the bonds with the children? Wary about the AI?
7. The AI themes, the development, not just robotic, the logarithms, knowledge of families, the amount of data, cameras in the house, recordings? The voice of AI? Welcoming, ingratiating? Knowledge, help, suggestions?
8. The relationship with each of the family, helping Meredith with the children, suggestions, research for her doctorate? Diagnosis of Carl’s illness? With Preston, controlling him, his control of AI? This, photographing herself, the boyfriend, his exposure, sending the photo, everybody receiving it, the comments, her feelings, the callous attitude of the boy in the court case, aged 18? The intervention of AI, the solutions, interventions, changing photos, changing interventions, messages, saving Iris?
9. Curtis, is beginning to be suspicious, with his boss, the company being bought out, the boss being rich? Curtis’s interview with the company, their of human job, his refusal?
10. Melody, the two agents telling this story, their appeal, their being shot? His encounter with Melody, her approaches, his reaction? Smashing the machine – but finding it empty? The locals, return home?
11. AI, personality, voice, interventions, changes for each character, becoming more sinister, all at home, Curtis returning? Preston in his room, Kel and his mother, the stories? AI and her stories for Kel?
12. The arrival of the mast couple, sinister, menacing, Mark self, this story, the confrontations? Curtis and his persuasion?
13. The semi-happy ending, AI destroyed, the family together, but the sinister ending with AI actually still in control?
14. The AI and social issues, the development of AI, its use, manipulation, algorithms, power and understanding, insinuating into lives, controlling lives, eventually controlling society?

VERSUS: THE LIFE AND FILMS Of KEN LOACH

UK, 2016, 93 minutes.

Tony Garnett, Ken Loach.

Directed by Louise Osmond.

Born in 1936, making films into his 80s, Ken Loach is a British national treasure, television and film director, recipient of many awards.

However, the opening credits indicate the contradictory comments about Loach and his career, praise and condemnation.

This documentary, made in 2016, the year that Loach turned 80, and was making his award-winning (Golden Palm at Cannes) social drama, I, Daniel Blake. This is this documentary in the present, many scenes of scouting locations, conversations with the cast, filming.

The host of the film, the main commentary comes from Loach’s longtime friend and associate, producer Tony Garnett. He offers a friendly interpretation of his friend, able to fill in their work and difficulties with the BBC in the 1960s, their breakthrough and success with Kes, 1969.

There are a great number of contributors in interviews, producers, associates, cast, including a very interesting commentary by Gabriel Byrne about Jim Allen’s controversial play, Perdition, at the Royal Court, 1987. Further omments are interesting and throw light on Loach as a person, as a director, the development of his political views. And there are also informative interviews with his wife and his children – and Loach himself reflecting on an accident and the death of one of his children and its effect ever after.

And there is Loach himself, rather quiet in his manner, but determined. There is explanation of his background, his family, his father’s work and promotion in a factory, moved to Liverpool, more upper crust side of Liverpool, his education at schools, study at Oxford, his interest in theatre and performance, meeting his wife.

His mid-to-late 20s he began to work at the BBC, with Tony Garnett, working on social documentaries, and by some of the BBC executives, by audiences and commentators – excerpts from many of the films especially Up the Junction (and the author of the novel, Nell Dunn), and a strong focus on the Cathy, Come Home and its star Carol White. Some very strong excerpts and social commentary.

Then the interest in the book, Kes, filming it, the comments from his boy star later, David Bradley, unexpected success. This was not followed by further success, Garnett making the comment that their succeeding film, family Life, did not take in enough money to pay the usher.

The 70s was a strange time for Loach, difficult to make documentaries, subject to further criticism, attacks for his left-leaning political philosophy. He was reduced, transmitted embarrassment in the film, to make commercials, even for McDonald’s. He had little activity during the 1980s making documentaries about the miners strikes but difficulties for screenings.

However, with a small budget film on the Irish troubles, Hidden Agenda, 1990, and its screening in Cannes despite its being denounced as pro-IRA, it won an award, notice for Loach, and the resumption of his career, 30 years of striking filmmaking, twice winning the Golden Palm at Cannes, many British awards (and, for the International Catholic film organisation and its ecumenical collaborations with the Protestant, Interfilm, a special award at Cannes 2004 – and the acknowledgement that he was the main director who had won their awards at festivals.)

There are conversations with Jim Allen, public left-wing author and collaborator with Loach. There are sequences from the films of his comeback in the 1990s, Riff-Raff, Ladybird, Ladybird, Raining Stones. And, films of conflict, Land of Freedom about the Spanish Civil War and The Wind that Shakes the Barley (Cannes, Golden Palm, 2004), with some commentary by its star, Cillian Murphy.

In 1996, Loach’s principal screenwriter was Scottish, Paul Laverty, and there is quite some commentary from him in the latter part of the film.

Loach had success in his early 30s, he was in his mid-50s that he began his most prolific filmmaking and success. His final film, in The Old Oak, released when he was 87.

Slight, quietly spoken, a gentleman, some of his friends also comment on his strong determination, and some steely ruthlessness.

THE RETURN

Ralph Fiennes, Juliette Binoche, Charlie Plummer, Marwan Kenzari, Claudio Santamaria, Angela Molina.

Directed by Uberto Pasolini.

One of the most significant returns in classical literature is that of Odysseus and his long journey back after the end of the Trojan War to his native Ithaca, a voyage of 10 years, many delays, many adventures, many challenges, an Odyssey.

In the past, there have been a number of films about the adventures of Odysseus/Ulysses in the 1950s with Kirk Douglas, in the 1997 television adaptation with Armand Assante and Greta Scacchi. Christopher Nolan is in production for a vast treatment of the Odyssey.

This version focuses on the last part of Homer’s epic. Which means that there are none of the adventurous and mythological episodes. It opens with a naked Odysseus stranded on the beach of Ithaca. He is found by a sympathetic slave, cared for, revives, keeps his identity secret, keeps up the appearance of a beggar.

Which means that this is a rather gripping personal drama, especially with Ralph Fiennes as Odysseus, bringing his powerful presence to the screen, the audience able to appreciate what is happening to him not only through what he says but with the intensity that Fiennes is able to communicate with his body language, manifesting, without words, much of the torment of his inner feelings.

And, there is Juliette Binoche as Penelope, the wife that he left behind, waiting for him, believing that he will return, sitting at her loom, declaring she will name a suitor after she finishes the garment, pulling it apart at night, starting again the next day. And she has been waiting 20 years, the 10 years of the war, the 10 years of her husband’s Odyssey. There is also their son, Telemachus, played by Charlie Plummer, disturbed by his father’s absence, disturbed by his mother’s behaviour, and the collapsed state of Ithaca in Odysseus’s absence.

Also of note for the film is the terrain of the island, fields, beaches, waves crashing on cliffs, waterfalls, steep mountains (filmed in Corfu), and the huge stone palace on the mountain top, fierce and foreboding, and its dimly lit interiors.

Ithaca is in chaos. There is a mounting number of suitors for her hand, lounging around, violent, demanding of Penelope. And she continues to resist, supported by her devoted nurse (Angela Molina).

And, so the questions. Will Odysseus make himself known? Will Penelope recognise him after this time? How will he encountere his son and Telemachus’s reaction? And what of the suitors and their idleness, exploiting the inhabitants of Ithaca?

The climax builds. Penelope has named the day to nominate the suitors she would choose. They gather. Odysseus in disguise is present. Telemachus is also present. And, as in the epic, Penelope demands that the suitors emulate Odysseus with his bow and arrow to be the successful suitor.

Suddenly, violence is let loose, Odysseus manifesting himself, a vicious  eruption, combat, slaughter, and the drama of the aftermath for Odysseus and Penelope, in view of what they we have seen. Will they be able to come together after the 20 years of physical and emotional distance.

With its serious dialogue, with its pauses, the intense drama, often interior, The Return plays something like an Opera scenario without the singing and music. Others have suggested that it is performed rather in the manner of a Shakespearean play. This is important to note for audiences who might have different expectations about this version of Homer, this time not the Odyssey as such, but, as the title highlights, the intensity of The Return.

(It is a surprise to find that the film has been cowritten and directed by Italian born, British director, Uberto Pasolini, a long-time producer, directing only four films including two beautifully quiet and recommended British films, Still Life and Nowhere Special.)

1. The status of Homer and his epics? Audience knowledge of the Iliad and the Odyssey? Of Odysseus, Penelope, Odysseus and his wanderings home?
2. The focus on the final chapters of The Odyssey, the title and simply, the Return? None of the popular stories of the epic? Memories of Troy, the battles, the wooden horse, the destruction? No mention of the gods, especially Athena and her role in Odysseus’ return?
3. The Greek locations, Corfu standing in for Ithaca, the cliffs, plains, waterfall, mountains? The scenes of the village, poverty and homes, the commanding palace on the mountain, the interiors, the lighting? The atmospheric musical score?
4. The screenplay, the dialogue, the interiority of the characters, interchanges? Operatic without the stylised singing? Like a Shakespearean performance?
5. The cliffs, Odysseus on the shore, naked, found by Eumaes his family, cared for, revived? Seen as a bigger, questions about the Trojan War, Odysseus and his memories, his account, regrets? The eager listening? His hearing about Penelope, the suitors, about Telemachus? Biding his time?
6. Penelope, the happy marriage, her husband going to the, the birth of Telemachus, his growing up, 20 years of the war and the Odyssey? Her waiting for her husband, devoted, her spending her time at the loom, the range of suitors, her putting them off, the loom for her father-in-law’s death? A relationship with Telemachus, his impatience, denouncing his father? The devotion of the nurse?
7. The range of suitors, their motivations, personalities, exploitation of the people, exploitation of the land, Ithaca and its collapse? The idling around the palace, the rivalries, hunting? Their being put off? A new suitor arriving and his being wounded, being thrown back into the water?
8. Antinous, his presence, devotion to Penelope, attitude towards Telemachus, the scene with his night with the slave girl? His conversations with Penelope, urging his cause?
9. Odysseus, his recovery, his going out into the countryside, his dismay? Hearing the story of the suitors? His desire to go to the palace, the episode with the dog which recognised him, the reaction of the suitors, ridicule, hostility, his asking for food? The confrontation and his ability to kill the opponents? The withdrawal of the suitors?
10. Telemachus, his criticisms, his sailing off, the dangers and his return? The suitors and their hostility? The desire to hunt him down?
11. Odysseus, food, his being washed, the nurse recognising his will and in scar, his urging her to silence?
12. The meeting with Telemachus, the revelation that he was his father, Telemachus and his hostile reaction? The hunt, the suitors, Odysseus knocking his son, Eumaes and the helpers, the pursuit, climbing the cliff, safe? Telemachus and his interactions with his father? Accusations, criticisms?
13. The pressure on Penelope, her undoing the weaving, continuing the next day, her upset and tearing it apart? Antinous and his pressurising Penelope? Her decision to name one of the suitors?
14. The gathering, Odysseus present? Telemachus? Penelope and her setting the test of the bow and the arrows? The attempts of the various suitors and their failure? Penelope telling Telemachus to give the bow to his father? Odysseus, warming the bow, twisting it between his legs, setting it up, firing the arrow?
15. The suitors and their upset, Odysseus and his firing all the arrows, killing the suitors? The closing of the doors? Telemachus, the confrontation with Antinous, his mother telling him not to kill the suitor, his killing him?
16. The consequences, blood, the deaths? Telemachus and his decision to sail away?
17. The encounters between Odysseus and Penelope, the conversations, his leaving, her devotion, the past, the war, his return, the violence, the deaths of the suitors? His turning over the loom, opening the door, ascending to the bedroom? Their talk, to understand each other, to overcome the violence in the past, sharing these memories, some forgiveness, acceptance, and hope for the future?

THE LEGEND OF BARON TO’A

New Zealand, 2020, 104 minutes, Colour.

John Tui, Uli Latukefu, Jay Lage'aia, Nathanial Lees, Xavier Horan.

Directed by Kiel McNaughton.

A New Zealand film, set in a suburban city street, a focus on Tom is living in New Zealand, adapting to the style, but with their traditions. The central character is played by Australian actor, Uli Latukefu. This is a film very much for the Tongan community and the wider New Zealand audience. Audiences from outside New Zealand will look on with interest for the human story, the cultural issues, for the background of wrestling and fighting.

The Baron of the title is a wrestling champion from the 1990s. There are scenes of him at home, his bond with his young son, Fritz, and young people in the street. The action then goes 30 years forward, Fritz having spent 10 years in Australia, returning home to sell the house that his father lived in, but a condition from his uncle, who continues to watch the Baron’s fights on television, it up in the fights and politics and control of the street, that house not be sold until the Baron’s victory trophy belt is recovered from some of the locals.

The focus is on Fritz, a big man, trained by his father, but with mixed feelings towards his father and his reputation and the influence of his son, having left home to find himself in Australia. A great deal of interactions with his uncle, explanations, encouragement for him to build himself up and to be able to fight the dominant leaders in the community. Eventually he does so, a collage of training sequences, even including the little girl from the door who plays a role in the ultimate fights.

The local leader runs a club, a haven for the unemployed, the tough older men, the next generation who are taking after them. A lot of fights, a lot of bullying, threats and strutting.

There is a complication with the main white character in the film, the local policeman, having an affair with the next-door neighbour, highly assertive but also cowardly in his behaviour and attitudes. He is aware of the problems, tries at times to solve them, but also likes to sway through his weight around, especially towards Fritz.

At one stage, hearing the crash of his mute friend, riding in a reconstructed wheelchair, his friend on fire, which has a vision of his father, talking, explanations, embrace and reconciliation, encouraging him then to fight for the locals.

Fight fans will certainly relish all the fighting combat sequences, which is often taking a beating, but encouraged to continue to stand up, confront, especially the local chief.

Friendship with the woman next door, the belt restored to the house and to his uncle, the humiliation of the local policeman, the removal of the force a for sale sign that the house, happy ending.