BODY MELT

Australia, 1993, 81 minutes, Colour.
Gerard Kennedy, Andrew Daddo, Ian Smith, Regina Gaigalas, Vincent Gil, Matthew Newton.
Directed by Philip Brophy.

This is an Australian horror film of the 1990s, directed (and with many other credits, including musical composition) by Philip Brophy who made a number of similar films, shorts and feature films in the late 80s and into the 90s. They are the type of films which are popular at Monster Fests.

While the setting looks ordinarily suburban, there are a sinister goings-on behind some of the suburban walls, especially of abandoned buildings. This is a film of mad scientists doing all kinds of strange experiments, allegedly respectable and experimenting with products for the market.

However, the laboratories are full of bodies, all subject to sinister goings-on – and some very special horror effects in their decomposition.

There is some respectability from the Australian film industry with Gerard Kennedy as one of the police investigating the situation, Andrew Daddo as his assistant.

The film draws its audience in with a character desperate for some kind of relief from his infection, going to a supermarket and drinking disinfectant – but then gruesomely melting. He is investigating the operation which leads to more police involvement, more visits to the laboratories, a range of characters who become victims, a suave woman who is the public face of the experiments.

Not one that the general public would be putting on their list of must-see films, but popular with the audiences at the previously mentioned Monster Fests.

AMERICAN ANIMALS

US, 2018, 116 minutes, Colour.
Evan Peters, Barry Keoghan, Blake Jenner, Jared Abrahamson, Ann Dowd.
“The real� Spencer Reinhard, Warren Lipka, Eric Borsuk, Chas Allen, Betty Jean Gooch.
Directed by Bart Layton.


What to make of the title? Animal animals? Human animals? Animal behaviour? And in America?

This is a very cleverly prepared film, the dramatic narrative-like fiction. But, intercut is documentary material. (Writer-director, British Bart Layton made an award-winning documentary, The Imposter, 2012.)

It is a story of a heist, a true story from 2003, the setting a university in Kentucky. It involves four young adult students who share the idea of the robbery, stealing and selling some rare books kept in the University library, especially some manuscripts of the naturalist, Audubon (with some beautiful reproductions during the opening credits). It is meant to be something of an adventure, for them to be ‘special’ – which does indicate something of the basically amoral attitudes and perspectives of the young men, their lives and their future.

But, the key element is interviews with each of the four, designated as “the real…�. And these interviews are intercut throughout the whole narrative, the audience watching the performers and experiencing drama, character development, the building up of the plot and the situations, while looking at and listening to the actual men.

One is an art student who appreciates the books and sketches. He is played by Irishman, Barry Keegan. Interestingly, he is of the slight of build and rather timid compared with the “real� Spencer Reinhard who makes quite a good impression, rather taller and thinner physically, but articulate in his telling the story but also in his moral assessment. Evan Peters is Warren Lipka, the leader of the group, seemingly supremely self-confident, arrogant in manner, even shown in a trip to Amsterdam to make contact with potential buyers (did this actually happen or just his story?). The real Warren Lipka looks and sounds pretty self-confident (which is certainly not justified by how he actually acted during the heist).

There is also the bookish Eric Borsuk (Jared Abrahamson)– not quite sure why he said yes to become involved. The real Eric is also rather bookish and theoretical. The getaway driver is a jock Chas Allen (Blake Jenner).

The librarian is played by Ann Dowd, while the real Betty Jean Gooch is interviewed years later with some wise comments.

Interesting to watch the interactions, the manipulation, different leadership roles – and the planning, diagrams, strategies. Even more interesting to see the fiasco dimensions of what actually happened – the presumptions and expectations versus the multi-mistakes of the planning.

At the end, there are the personal assessments of each of the men, of their prison experience, and what it has meant for their lives.

1. The title, the focus, expectations?

2. The blend of narrative and drama with documentary interviews? The intercutting?

3. The credits, the visuals, the sketches, the birds, nature, animals? The books by Audubon? The focus on the evolution of the animals, to the centre of America, to Kentucky?

4. The film claiming not to be based on a true story but actually a true story? The documentary aspect, the interviews with the real four, the presentation, older men, remembering and commenting on the past, on their exploits, revealing their characters, attitudes? The reassessing their behaviour after the events and after their imprisonment? The indication of their jobs? The future?

5. The plausibility of the plot? The four students, Kentucky, their friendships, contacts? Age? Their wanting to make something of their lives, to be important? The amoral attitude? Agreeing to the robbery of rare books? The focus on Spencer, his idea? His recruiting Warren, Warren and his leadership, his personality, contrasting with the more introverted Spencer? The recruiting of Eric, his bullishness, reluctance? The recruiting of Chas, the jock, as a driver? The audience seeing the personalities being interviewed and comparing with the actors in their performances and interpretation?

6. Spencer, art, his knowledge of the library, the setup, the librarian? The idea? His personality, ambitious yet retiring? His sequences at home, his parents and sister, family celebrations? His plans, exams, part?

7. The contrast with Warren, his background, self-confidence? Ideas, planning, strategies and tactics? His visit to Amsterdam, the contact with the art fences, the discussions, his manipulation, their agreement? The question as to whether this really happened, Warren making it up? The flashback to his being dropped at the airport and his being picked up? His pressure on the others?

8. Eric, bookish, retiring, his being persuaded to participate, his recurring hesitations? Cautions? The contrast with Chas, not involved in the robbery except for the driving, the getaway?

9. The interaction between the four, the details of planning, diagrams and photos on the wall? Warren taking control? The others contributions, agreement? Exams as their alibis, showing them at the exams, present, leaving?

10. The issue of the librarian, not wanting to injure her, Warren taking responsibility?

11. The details of the actual robbery? The decision to be disguised as old men – and the indication of these themes during the opening credits? The make up, the arrival, as a group, their demeanour, the appointment with the librarian? The beginning of fatal flaws? The librarians having a meeting and their having to abandon the plan to the next day?

12. The next day, going as themselves? Chas ready with the car, Spencer, his reluctance, wanting to pull out, yet with the binoculars and being the lookout? Eric downstairs, waiting for the call from Warren? Warren, going to the library, the people in the library, the librarian, her opening the door, the appointment, the conversation? Looking at the books, their beauty? Calling Eric, his coming? The taser, overcoming the librarian? The resistance?

13. The fiasco in getting the books, looking for the key, around the librarian’s neck? Getting some of the books, the Audubon manuscript being too large, wrapping one in cloth, going downstairs, the elevator, opening at the library floor, the darkness of the basement and their not finding the exit, having to come up again, the decision to carry the book
down the stairs? The getaway car?

14. The consequences, the recovery of the Audubon? The police investigations? Their holding onto the two books? Going to the dealer in New York, her admiration for the books, asking them to wait?

15. The police, finally rounding them up, the court case, their imprisonment? The sentence for seven years?

16. The poor preparation despite their ambitions? The touches of the witless? Their motivation, amoral stances, crime and their wanting to make their mark? The repercussions on their lives and on the future?

THE SEA GULL


US, 1968, 121 minutes, Colour.
James Mason, Vanessa Redgrave, Simone Signoret, David Warner, Harry Andrews, Denholm Elliott, Eileen Herlie, Alfred Lynch, Kathleen Widdoes, Ronald Radd.
Directed by Sidney Lumet.

This is a 1960s version of Anton Chekhov’s play. It has quite an eclectic cast, principally British actors. Simone Signoret stands out she’s one different, some audiences finding her accent difficult to understand.

Chekhov’s Russian world is quite enclosed. The period is 1904, a summer on an estate in the countryside, family members and others present, enclosed, rather bored. In some senses, it indicates that a revolution is needed.

With the range of characters, there are many aspects of focusing, a display of the many characters and their tangled relationships. At the centre is the ageing actress, Irina, and her ailing brother, played by Harry Andrews. She also has her lover, the author, played by James Mason. The next generation is represented by the actress’s son, David Warner, a temperamental person, playwright, disdain for the traditions, depressed and suicidal. He is attracted to a neighbour, Nina, Vanessa Redgrave, who wants to be an actress but is also intrigued by the author. In the meantime, the daughter of the maid, Masha (Kathleen Widdoes) is infatuated with the actress’s son but has to make do in practical terms with the local teacher. The resident doctor, Denholm Elliott, is present with his ability to listen and offer advice.

The film was directed by Sidney Lumet, celebrated American director with a wide range of experience in television years to 12 Angry Men, to film versions of Long Day’s Journey into Night as well as Equus. It was also noted for police and crime thrillers, Serpico, Dog Day Afternoon.

Chekhov’s play was remade in 2018.

1. The work of Anton Chekhov? Theatrical, style? The focus on many characters, their interactions? Characters on display?

2. An international interpretation, cast, accents, style?

3. Hurrying to the country, the ill brother? The summer?

4. The range of characters, many, changing focus, the relationships and the tangles?

5. The theatre, a theatrical film? Critique of the theatre and theatrical types? Irina, her performances? Relationship with Konstantin, his writing the play, Nina and her performance? The musical score?

6. Sorin, his character, ill and dying, the family gathering?

7. The summer, the house, the grounds, the countryside and the forest, the lake, the views?

8. Irina, her age, her career, her husband, lovers, the tension of her relationship with her son, her performances, performing in real life, narcissistic, chatter, her performance during her son’s play, spurning him? The comparison with Nina? Her relationship with the doctor? The dependence on Polina? Polina’s husband, defying her? Her relationship with Trigorin, the age difference, her power over him? The concern about clothes, appearance, vanity? Kostya shooting himself, her concern? Belittling Nina? Wanting to possess Trigorin, manipulating him?

9. Trigorin, celebrated writer, succeeding and failing notes, observing? His relationship with Irina, not talking about himself? Kostya and his jealousy? The attraction to Nina, the infatuation, Irina controlling him against Nina? Revealed as callow? Kostya, Nina acting in his play, the words in her delivery, people’s reactions afterwards? Meeting Trigorin, amazed, infatuation, falling in love, talking with him? Her decision to act? Going off, her performances, failures, her return?

10. Konstantin, young, temperament, his moods, love for Nina, the play, her performance, calling it off, upset, going off by himself, deriding contemporary culture, wanting elevated culture? Masha and her devotion to him? Shooting himself, his writing the stories, Nina, her return? Shooting himself?

11. Masha, the teacher and his infatuation and devotion, her rejection? The decision about marrying the teacher, her treatment of him? The relationship to her mother and father?

12. The teacher, concerned about money, the difficulties in teaching, his infatuation with Masha? Presence in the house, marrying her?

13. The doctor, the past, his help, observing, counselling?

14. Polina, the household, her husband? Her relationship with her daughter? Her infatuation the with the doctor, wanting to be with him?

15. The place of the servants, the ironic comments and expressions?

16. Sorin, his lack of achievement in his life, not writing, not marrying? The law, sad for over 10 years, advising others?

17. A society that was rich, bored – and a preview to the Russian Revolution.

VENOM

US, 2018, 112 minutes, Colour.
Tom Hardy, Michelle Williams, Riz Ahmed, Scott Haze, Reid Scott, Jenny Slate, Melora Walters, Woody Harrelson.
Directed by Ruben Fleischer.

If The Predator were persuaded to go to the movies, then Venom would be an obvious recommendation. In fact, the hopes and ambitions of The Predator are fulfilled in Venom. The Predator and fellow aliens were involved in coming to earth, taking of the best qualities of humans, and experience of symbiosis. Symbiosis is to the fore in Venom but not quite in a way that was expected – who would have thought an alien and a human coexisting, dialoguing with each other, becoming a kind of superhero and avenger of evil?

This indication of the tone and style of Venom shows that it is both serious in its themes and somewhat humorous in its style.

Tom Hardy looks as if he is enjoying himself in the role of Eddie Brock, a television journalist in San Francisco, high ratings, living with Anne, a legal expert, and, played by Michelle Williams. However, he is ambitious, and a special target is Carlton Drake (Riz Ahmed) a self-made entrepreneur whose spaceship was seen at the beginning of the film, exploding, crash landing in Malaysia, and some of the samples, alien samples, set free during the crash (and taking over one of the scientists, then an old woman at the airport, the alien moving from human to human (and a dog or two), living within them and giving them heightened powers.

One of Carlton Drake’s assistants, Dr Skirth (Jenny Slate) has some conscience issues and approaches Eddie, taking him to the plant, his taking incriminating photos, trying to help one of the experimental victims and, of course, being infected himself. (Actually, he refers to having a parasite but Venom really dislikes the word!).

It is not difficult to foretell the directions in which the screenplay will go. Michelle Williams must have been pleased to have the opportunity to have the parasite/alien inside the and take her over. Her new boyfriend, Dan (Reid Scott) is a surgeon and does his best to help Eddie.

Car chases, car crashes, building up to a confrontation between Carlton Drake and Eddie in alien monstrous form, and the realisation that Venom really likes being one with Eddie and that they have an evil-avenging career before them (though Venom is prone to like eating antagonists). And then, early in the final credits, Eddie visits a jail and who should be there but Woody Harrelson… So, more venom/Venom.

1. From the Marvel Universe? A different kind of story?

2. The title, poison? The name of the alien? Taking possession of Eddie? Eddie becoming Venom?

3. The San Francisco settings, the landmarks, city, towers, bridges, the building on the side of the mountains? The interiors of the plant? The streets, apartments? Restaurants and shops? The musical score?

4. A variation on the superhero character? Competence, loser, transformed? The alien living within him, the alien appearance taking over? Superpowers? Confrontation of evil characters?

5. A variation on the monster movie, the aliens, arrival from space, taking over humans, symbiosis? The experiments? The victims and deaths? The escape of the aliens, the takeovers?

6. The serious side of the story, science fiction, aliens and symbiosis, the mad and evil scientist, staff, experiments? The consequences for human experience?

7. The flippant side of the story, the offhand remarks, the comic touches, dialogue, and spoofs of monster movies? And the car chases and fights?

8. Eddie’s story, his background, his television program, the high ratings, his relationship with Anne, living together, her legal work, his interviews? The antagonism towards Carlton Drake? Reading the confidential documents on Anne’s computer, using them in the interview with Drake, probing, Drake and his hostility? The complaints? The boss, helping Eddie, sacking him?

9. The background of the spaceship during the opening, crashing, Malaysia, the escaping of the samples, the takeover of the characters, the scientist from the spaceship, the old woman in the airport and her later going to the United States? And the irony of taking over dogs?

10. Eddie, down on his luck, the visit to the Chinese shop and the protection racket man? Upset, going to Annie’s house, her arriving with Dan, the breakup?

11. Carlton Drake, his empire, self-made, surveillance of the space craft crash? His concern, the samples? Symbiosis, his plans, the experiments, the expendable humans, the visualising of the tests? Dr Skirth and her assistance? The pressure on her, her unwillingness, her going to see Eddie? The explanations? His accompanying her to the plant, taking the photos, aware of the experiments, the alien getting out, taking him over, fighting off the guards? The physical effect on him, psychological, hearing the voice of Venom from inside? Its taking him over on the outside, the physical appearance, his shock?

12. Anne and Dan, the help, the hospital, the MRI? The further developments, the dialogue between Venom and Eddie? The guards, the continued pursuits? The car chases? Dan and the tests, offering to help? Anne, the encounter, her being taken over? The kiss?

13. Maria, on the streets, selling the papers? Her death? The woman in the hospital with the dog? In the shop, the protection racket, the confrontation, his being devoured?

14. The buildup to the confrontation with Carlton Drake, his being taken over, the experience of symbiosis? Hero and villain in confrontation?

15. Eddie, his job, interviews, friendship with Anne, accepting his being one with Venom – their future?

16. The credits and the indication of the future – and the Woody Harrelson cameo?

SEVEN KEYS TO BALDPATE

US, 1947, 64 minutes, Black and white.
Phillip Terry, Jacqueline White, Eduardo Cianelli, Margaret Lindsay, Arthur Shields, Jimmy Conlin, Jason Robards Sr.
Directed by Lew Landers.

This is the fifth version of Seven Keys to Baldpate, first filmed in 1917, based on a play by George M. Cohan. The original novel was written by Earl Derr Biggers, best known as the author of the Charlie Chan stories.

The action of the story takes place overnight, Phillip Terry is a popular novelist with murder mysteries, making a bet that he could write a short story overnight, staying at the isolated inn, closed for the winter, owned by the man making the bet, Baldpate. On the train, his manuscript is stolen. The town is isolated, the stationmaster (who is reading a thriller but says he prefers the shootings rather than psychological talk) indicates the way to The inn through the snow. A mysterious young woman at the station begs him not to go.

When the author arrives, thinking he has the only key from the owner, he finds a character inside who claims to be the caretaker (Eduardo Cianelli who always had the talent for looking sinister). The young woman turns up, another woman turns up with the caretaker stating that she is his niece, the local hermit also climbs in the window, then another man turns up as well as an alleged professor. And they all have keys!

In some ways the film looks a touch like a parody of old haunted house movies. However, there are plenty of rational explanations. The alleged caretaker is involved with a plan where robbers steal from a jewellery store owner, who also turns up, wanting some insurance money. The mysterious woman is also in on the act, everybody in fact wanting the money and doing double deals – with the killing of the store owner.

On the other hand, with humorous touches, the young woman at the station turns out to be the owner’s secretary and her job is to prevent the writer finishing his story and winning the bet. At the end, he chooses her rather than the money! And there is some comedy with the local hermit who eventually calls in the police. And the professor turns out to be a private detective for the insurance company.

A number of twists, number of shootings, comic touches, and some satisfactory explanations.

BACKTRACK BOYS

Australia, 2018, 90 minutes, Colour.
Bernie Shakeshaft.
Directed by Catherine Scott.

One might call this documentary, “heartening�.

The title refers to a scheme for helping boys and young teenagers to deal better with their lives. It is the brainchild of Bernie Shakeshaft, who appears throughout the film, who spent some time in the Northern Territory when young, appreciated his experience with aboriginal Australians and wants to bring some of this experience to helping the younger generation. And he does.

The setting is north-western New South Wales, Armidale and New England and shows in country towns like Wellington and Condobolin. The audience will feel that they have spent some time living in the area – which is what the director, Catherine Scott, did for two years, embedded in the Backtrack program, sharing life with the boys, with the range of volunteers who work with Bernie Shakeshaft, capturing the ordinary moments, dramatising the boys and their love for the dogs and their training them and helping perform at the local town shows, but also sharing in the drama, the pressures on the boys from their backgrounds, their woundedness, some wilfulness, some hopes.

The opening, with the dogs, and the performances, the boys coming to life by working in training the dogs, is certainly an attraction for dog-lovers.

Once the film has established the work of Bernie Shakeshaft and made the audience welcome at the centre and residence outside Armidale, the film focuses on three young lads who represent all those who have lived and worked at Backtrack.

The teenager, Zach, is the most sympathetic of the three. He has come from Alice Springs, his father has walked out on his wife and children and established a new family, with Zach sent to Backtrack. The experience has been most beneficial for him, bringing out a strong and sympathetic character, his working with some of the younger boys. But, there is a lot of anger in him which has to be dealt with. The audience finds itself very on-side towards him, hoping for the best when he prepares for a job and goes to an interview. But, the rejection brings out his anger, some violence and, to audience dismay, a prison sentence.

The cheeky 12-year-old that Zach helps mentoring is Russell, very brief attention span as he himself confesses. He can be rude, angry, impatient, violent. But, he identifies with the Backtrack program, is more than at home with the dogs and their training. He goes home to his father who loves him but cannot manage him – and, some violence and disruption, leading to a court hearing.

The third boy, Tyler who has had some drug problems, actually goes to jail at the beginning of the film, learns something from his prison experience and, on release, is reunited with his girlfriend.

So, the film is working on two levels, the dramatic story of the boys, the portrait of Bernie Shakeshaft and his vision, a heartening look at someone, with his volunteers, who is concerned about young men in Australian society, drawbacks, trauma, failures, possibilities for hope and success. Heartening certainly and a most worthy enterprise, eliciting admiration from those of us who are not so directly involved.

1. The impact of the documentary? The director two years embedded with the group? The portrait, sympathetic? Social themes – and the tone of exultation?

2. The title, the organisation, Bernie Shakeshaft, Armidale and the surroundings, country towns of Western New South Wales, the shows with the dogs? The centre and the residents? The musical score?

3. The introduction, the dogs, the boys, the racial backgrounds, the schools with the dogs, the audiences at the show, the purpose of the organisation, its success, the role of the dogs?

4. Bernie Shakeshaft and his life, years in the Northern Territory, his aims and motivations, succeeding with the youngsters, listening to them, wise advice, training them, accompanying them in their lives, the range of volunteers, with the dogs, cooking and teaching cooking, medical, the teachers?

5. The focus on Zack, Russell and Tyler, their stories? The personalities, their ages, experience, Angus, the relationship with Bernie Shakeshaft?

6. Zack, his hopes, poise, his past, from Alice Springs, aboriginal background, the father leaving and making a new family, his mother? His success in Backtrack? Wanting a job, preparing for the interviews? Not getting the job, his anger, the fight, the sentence, going to prison, getting out, the future?

7. Russell, his age, death of his mother, the father unable to handle him, his brief attention span, going home, trouble, at Backtrack, his liking it, cheeky, with the dogs? Preparing for court, his not being sentenced?

8. Tyler, the drugs, his story, going to prison, in prison and his work, getting out, his girlfriend?

9. The impact of the drama of the stories?

10. Social concerns, youngsters and support them, the program at Backtrack, of those contributing like Bernie Shakeshaft? The volunteers?

THE SEAGULL

US, 2018, 98 minutes, Colour.
Annette Bening, Saoirse Ronan, Corey Stoll, Brian Dennehy, Elisabeth Moss, Billy Howell, Jon Tenney, Michael Zegen, Mare Winningham, Glenn Fleshler.
Directed by Michael Mayer.

Anton Chekhov is considered a great Russian playwright, a great world playwright. There are continued performances of his Three Sisters, Uncle Vanya, The Cherry Orchard and The Seagull. 50 years ago Sidney Lumet directed a film version of The Seagull with Simone Signoret as the ageing actress, James Mason as her lover and the young Vanessa Redgrave as the aspiring actress.

Chekhov’s pre-Revolution world is rather enclosed, the characters often feeling stifled and/or bored – as if a revolution, which Chekhov did not see, was necessary to bring these characters to real life.

One of the difficulties for an audience is that it may also feel stifled, somewhat trapped in this rather artificial world. The audience needs to concentrate, be willing to empathise with the characters (not an easy task at times) to appreciate who they are and how they live. And, with so many characters on display in The Seagull, there are so many/ too many focal points, an array of a great number of characters, and their relationships are tangled.

The initial setting is 1904, the applause for actress, Irena (Annette Bening at her imperious and insensitive-to-others best, including her highly-strung son, Konstantin (Billy Howell), in a Moscow theatre and the immediate summons to go to the country estate where her brother (Brian Dennehy in a welcome appearance) is dying. Then there is a flashback to the summer, two years earlier when most of the action of the film takes place. In an interesting device, the opening several minutes are repeated exctly at the end of the film, the audience reaction to the characters so much more different now that they have got to know and like (or dislike) them.

Irina dominates the summer, narcissistic, insensitive, manipulative. Corey Stoll is Boris, the celebrated author, her lover, seemingly a strong character but his later being criticised as spineless, being able to bend in all directions. Konstantine is moody, disdains popular theatre, writes a play which, at best, might be called poetic, and the young neighbour, Nina (Saoirse Ronan) performs before his mother’s loud and sarcastic comments causing him to stop the performance.

Some of the supporting characters do arouse the interest, especially Elisabeth Moss as Marsha, daughter of the maid, Polina (Mare Willingham), infatuated with Konstantin, wearing black because she is in mourning for her life, courted by the teacher who insists on mentioning, always, how hard his work is and with such little remuneration. Jon Tenney as the local doctor, relied on by most of the characters, offering advice, is always on hand.

So, if an audience is attuned to the plays of Chekhov, there is much to commend (although for some ears, somewhat disconcerting to find these early 20th century Russians or talking with strong American accents). If an audience is not attuned, better to find an alternative insight into pre--revolutionary Russia.

1. The work of Anton Chekhov? Theatrical, style? The focus on many characters, their interactions? Characters on display?

2. An American interpretation, accents, style?

3. The opening sequence, the theatre in Moscow, 1904, hurrying to the country, the ill brother? The flashbacks to the summer of two years earlier? The return to the opening sequence, the repetition, audiences understanding the characters better because of what they had seen?

4. The range of characters, many, changing focus, the relationships and the tangles?

5. The theatre, a theatrical film? Irina, her applause, her performances in players, the posters? Konstantin, his writing the play, Nina and her performance? Irina and her going on tour? The musical score?

6. Soren, his character, ill and dying, the family gathering, playing Lotto, Kostya and Nina and her arrival? The repetition and understandings of the characters better?

7. The summer, the house, the grounds, the countryside and the forest, the lake, the views?

8. Irina, her age, her career, her husband, lovers, the tension of her relationship with her son, her performances, performing in real life, narcissistic, chatter, her performance during her son’s play, talking out loud, spurning him? The picture with Nina and her wanting to look younger? Her relationship with the doctor? The dependence on Polina? Polina’s husband, defying her about the horses the carriage, his resigning? Her relationship with Boris, the age difference, her power over him? The concern about clothes, appearance, looking in the mirror? Kostya shooting himself, her concern, bandaging his head? Belittling Nina’s father and family? Wanting to possess Boris, manipulating him?

9. Boris, celebrated writer, always taking notes, observing? His relationship with Irina, not talking about himself? Kostya and his jealousy? The attraction to Nina, the infatuation, her gift of the token, the boat ride on the lake, Irina controlling him against Nina? The end, Kostya and his story, saying he would read it on the train? Revealed as Callow? Kostya, acting in his play, the words in her delivery, people’s reactions afterwards? Meeting Boris, amazed, infatuation, falling in love, giving him the token, talking with him? Her decision to act? Going off, her performances, failures, her return?

10. Kostya, young, temperament, the swimming, his moods, love for Nina, the kissing, the planned her performance, calling it off, upset, going off by himself, deriding contemporary culture, wanting elevated culture? Masha and her devotion to him? Shooting himself, the wound, wanting his mother to bandage the wound? His writing the stories, some celebratory fame after two years, Nina, her return? Shooting himself? The background of the actual seagull, Konstantin hunting, shooting, the conversation with Nina about the dead bird? Symbol of Nina?

11. Masha, wearing black, in mourning for her life, the teacher and his infatuation and devotion, her rejection? Her drinking, drugs? Upset, the search for Kostya, her breakfast talking with Boris, the decision about marrying the teacher, fact, her pregnancy, her treatment of him? The relationship to her mother and father?

12. The teacher, concerned about money, the difficulties in teaching, his infatuation with Masha? Presence in the house, marrying her?

13. The doctor, the past, his help, observing, counselling?

14. Polina, the household, her husband and his tantrums, resignations, the courses and cart? Her relationship with her daughter? Her infatuation the with the doctor, wanting to be with him?

15. The place of the servants, the ironic comments and expressions?

16. Sorin, his lack of achievement in his life, not writing, not marrying? The law, sad for over 10 years, advising others?

17. A society that was rich, bored – and a preview to the Russian Revolution.

BOY ERASED

US, 2018, 114 minutes, Colour.
Lucas Hedges, Nicole Kidman, Russell Crowe, Joel Edgerton, Xavier Dolan, Troye Sivan, Jesse La Tourette, Britton Sear
Directed by Joel Edgerton.

Audiences who choose to see Boy Erased will know that it is about conversion therapy, methods of therapy to convert gay candidates to a heterosexual life and orientation. It is based on the book of the same title written by Garrard Conley who is the centre of this film, a character called Jared Eamons. He is played with quite some sympathy and strength by Lucas Hedges (Oscar-nominated for Manchester by the Sea, Frances Mc Dormand’s son in Three Billboards).

An interesting note is that this was released at much the same time as another conversion therapy film, focused on a teenaged girl, The Miseducation of Cameron Post. There are similarities between the two films in the therapy, methods used, qualifications (or not) of those in charge of the program. Both films are worth seeing.

There is also an interesting Australian note. This very American story has been adapted for the screen by actor, Joel Edgerton, who directs as well and takes on the role of the therapist. And, while the setting is Arkansas, Jared’s parents are played by Nicole Kidman and Russell Crowe (appearing together at last!). Both give interesting and nuanced performances.

So, response to this story will depend on audience attitudes towards conversion therapy, approval or disapproval of its methods, the questioning of the qualifications (as happens in this film) of those who set themselves up to manage such programs. The antipathy towards conversion therapy will be heightened during the scenes of therapy, even the strict and stern entry into the centre, a bit like entering prison and giving up everything to be retrieved on release, filling out forms indicating defects in the family, preparing a diary of past encounters, hard role-plays with a therapist, while mouthing sympathetic and “honest� words of feedback, comes across as bullying.

There are two flashbacks where Jared has encountered a student at college and where he has been attracted to a visiting artist.

The program is not entirely prison-like, the young people not living in generally but going each evening to a local hotel with the parent or guardian, thus giving Jared the possibility of discussing everything with his mother, time to think about his father, an earnest man who runs a car dealership but is also the local preacher. The conversion centre also uses religious language, sometimes focusing on God, but more frequently focusing on behaviour and sin.

The religious background is strongly evangelical, the literal interpretation of God’s word as a norm for all behaviour. This raises difficulties for the father, disapproval of his son’s orientation, calling in religious elders to advise him, sending off his son to therapy. The presentation of the church and this version of Christianity would certainly alienate many audiences, especially compassionate Christian audiences.

Another strength of the film is in presenting glimpses of other young men and women doing the program, especially a rather hefty boy who is humiliated, literally belted by the family to express their disapproval and urge his conversion. Another boy salutes as a greeting because he does not want to touch anyone. And yet another advises Jared to fake the participation in the course.

Ultimately, Jared will confront the therapist in some highly dramatic moments.

The film ends four years later, Jared a writer, in contact with his mother, hoping that his father would read what he had published, visiting his father and talking very frankly to him. Audiences will leave the cinema with a touch of hope because of the final information about Jared, dismay at the information about the therapist, and a genial photo of the actual Garrard and his parents.

1. The title, the tone?

2. The themes, sexual orientation, conversion therapy, motives and methods of the programs, the qualifications? Audience reviews? The film’s stance? The credibility of the exploration of conversion therapy?

3. The American setting, Arkansas, the city, ordinary America? Homes, the conversion therapy centres? Towns, College? New York? The musical score?

4. The religious background, the specifically Christian background, evangelical churches, reliance on the Bible and the word of God and morality? (And the alienating of audiences from this kind of church, interpretation of the Bible, concept of God and sin?)

5. The screenplay, the complexity of the times, intercutting of the different times?

6. Lucas Hedges as Jared? His age, the home movies of him as a little boy, charm and happiness? Teenager, serious, his experiences, his relationship with his parents? The consciousness of his orientation? His perspectives? The fact that the character was based on the author of the book, the autobiographical perspectives?

7. The situation, his parents, his father as a preacher, his father and the car dealership and his wanting his son to inherit it? His being sent to the centre, the entry, the strictness? The manner of the personnel, the staff, the assistants, their being part of the program? The group, having been sent by family, young men and young women?

8. The initial experience, the information, filling out forms, the family chart, initials indicating aberrations in the family? Jared asking his mother, information about the family, the possible homosexual uncle? His mother and her reaction?

9. His having to keep the diary, the listing of encounters? The flashbacks to his experience of Henry, friendly, the running, talk, sharing the bunks, the sexual approach, the rape? Henry’s apology, weeping? Jared talking about the issue with his father, his father calling in the elders, the discussions, his father saying he always sought advice, to send Jared to the program?

10. The diary, the encounter with Xavier, the art exhibition, the attraction, discussions, going to his apartment, lying on the bed, willing?

11. Victor Sykes, character, impact, appearance, his methods, those working with him? His motives, qualifications, God language, emphasis on sin? His pressure on the group, the tearing of the dollar and talking about mending, his images of healing from homosexuality as an aberration?

12. Cameron, big, uncertain, not born a footballer but developing as a footballer and the use of this image for his orientation? His presence, support of Jared? The role-play, his being humiliated, the arrival of his family, his being beaten? His suicide? The impact on Jared?

13. Sykes, self-assured, his treatment of those assisting him, dictatorial, his smooth words, the scene of him smoking outside the toilet? The buildup to the confrontation with Jared, Jared defying him, the to and fro, Jared running, hiding in the toilet, phoning his mother, his mother’s arrival, looking through the glass, calling out, Sykes opening the door, Jared leaving, his mother saying shame to Sykes?

14. The range of others had to be centre, the blonde haired boy, his pretending, urging Jared to fake the behaviour and then get out? The teenager afraid of touch and saluting, and the moment of touching Jared? The young woman, being asked to confess, talking about her attractions and her behaviour? The glimpse of her later, not wanting Jared support, head down?

15. The tough speaker on the staff, the confrontation with Jared in the toilet?

16. Jared, his relationship with his father, seeing his father preaching, the meetings at the house with the elders? Jared and his return home, in the church, his father’s sermon pointedly at his son?

17. The passing of four years, Jared moving to New York, writing his stories, publication? Phoning his mother, asking whether father had read the articles?

18. Jared and his talk with his father, the frankness, his father and the genuine confession about his failures, but still not being able to accept his son despite loving him? Jared and his plain talking, telling his father the truth about how hard he was towards him? The invitation to celebrate Christmas with him?

19. The final credits, the photos of the actual family – and the resemblances to the actors? Reconciliation? Jared and his writing, his partner? The postscript about Victor Sykes – and his retirement and living with his partner?

THE TWINNING REACTION


US, 2017, 54 minutes, Colour.
Directed by Lori Shinseki.

A fascinating film.

For audiences who have seen Three Identical Strangers, with this story of triplets separated soon after birth in the US in the 1960s and their subsequent history, will appreciate this documentary in which the three adult men who have found each other also appear.

For audiences who have not seen Three Identical Strangers, it is highly recommended as a companion piece.

Peter Neubauer began investigations in the 1960s on the effect of separation of twins and triplets without the knowledge of the other siblings. The adopting parents did not know of the other children either. In contact with the Jewish Board for adoption in New York City adopting agencies, potential twins and triplets were assessed over some time as to whether they would be significant subjects for further study and quite an extensive program went ahead.

In this film, four sets of twins are brought together after many years. There are substantial and telling interviews with those concerned, their experience of feeling that they were not alone, satisfaction in discovering their fellow twins. And there are interviews with parents – many of them highly antagonistic towards the study as well as the adoption boards.

And the three men from Three Identical Strangers appear in this film as well.

There are also some of those involved in the in the study, not appreciating until later what they were involved in. And there is the journalist who broke the story. These interviewees also appear in Three Identical Strangers. There is footage of Peter Neubauer himself and of his associates.

The young children, adopted out to parents of different social backgrounds, were visited, questioned, notes made and reports kept. However, the archive of the reports has been sealed until the middle of the century.

Audience reaction to the film is a combination of sympathetic interest in the lives of those involved with the critical attitude, sometimes disbelief, that such procedures actually took place.

Audiences will be pleased to have the opportunity to see both of these films, The Twinning Reaction and Three Identical Strangers.

THE BBQ

Australia, 2018, 91 minutes, Colour.
Shane Jacobson, Magda Szubanski, Julia Zemiro, Frederik Simpson, Mano Fieldel, Nicholas Hammond, John Stanton, Lara Robinson, John Flaus.
Directed by Stephen Amis.

The BBQ is in the spirit of such films as The Castle, light comedy set in the Melbourne suburbs. However, it is rather slighter. While it appealed to audiences, it did not appeal to serious reviewers and critics.

There is an amusing connection of the Cook family with Captain Cook, finally revealed to be not true, quite inaccurate. However, amusingly, there is a link with the Cook on Captain Cook’s voyages, especially with the particular barbecue itself, a family heirloom.

Shane Jacobson, in the vein of Kenny, is Darren (Dazza) Cook, a great salesman for barbecues, hosting a barbecue every weekend with the week in preparation and the following week the family finishing off the meat at meals. Julia Zemiro plays Diane, his wife, very efficient at the supermarket. Frederik Simpson is the son, Jayden, who narrates the story and Lara Robinson is the younger daughter, Montana, who has decided to be vegan, keeps silent in the house, communicates by placards and signs, especially boycotting the BBQ.

While there is some tensions at home, Dazza is asked by his boss to be a part of the Great Australian BBQ Bonanza. He is not expected to win but just simply to promote. He has also assigned to The Butcher for training. She is played by Magda Szubanski in serious comic form and her assistant, Carver, is played by Nicholas Hammond in a good role (long memories of The Sound of Music). There Is a dastardly Frenchman who has had a bad effect on The Butcher and Carver (memories of his sabotaging their being cooks to the Royal Family at Balmoral).

The film echoes multiracial themes, aboriginal issues and Captain Cook, aboriginal neighbours, an Indian friend, a Japanese beef farmer – all with comic touches but, finally, at school, the Australian flag and the aboriginal flag at the back of the stage.

Comic touches in preparation. Comic touches in the tensions at home and Dazza as being the typical Australian man who does not always “get it� as regards wife and family.

No bets about who wins the Bonanza, It is a sure thing. And it all ends with a rather rollicking song in praise of the BBQ.


1. The title, the Aussie barbecue? Its place in Australian popular culture?

2. The Melbourne suburbs, homes, the streets, the yards? The shopping centres? The butcher shop? The barbecue sale store? Offices? The competition, the crowds, the tents, the stoves and barbecues? The contrast with the countryside, the cattle, the paddocks, the stalls, the IT equipment?

3. The musical score, the title song, rollicking over the final credits?

4. The Captain Cook connection, Darren (Dazza), the memories of Captain Cook, the Endeavour, voyages, exploration? The replica in the backyard? Dazza and his stories about Captain Cook, Jayden and his belief in the stories? His voice-over and enthusiasm? Telling a family story?

5. The explanation of the barbecue, the later explanation of the cook on the Endeavour, the meals, the actual barbecue, family heirloom, finally handing it over to the museum?

6. Dazza, Shane Jacobson and his comical style, love for Diane, her role in the supermarket, efficiency, creative ideas, the offer for promotion? Jayden, at school, his close friends, his speech about his family, going to the wharf, finding the Museum and the Maritime expert, the documents? His support of his father, a good relationship? The contrast with Montana, vegan, silence, her placards and protests, even at the table? Boycotting the barbecue?

7. The friends, the racial mix, the Indian and his ideas, his wife, his yellow coat, his vehicle – and coming to the rescue with the meat at the end? The contrast with Diane’s parents, politician, Szubanski, the serious comic tone? The background story with the Frenchman, the poisoning of the Royal Family at Balmoral? Losing her job, their coming to Australia? The resentment? The tough stances, bossing Dazza around? Making demands on him, the meat cuts, the knives, having to wash up everything, the visit to the country, the Japanese and his method for treating the cattle, grain feeding, in the paddocks, the computers and testing, the Japanese language and methods and rituals? Dazza and his having to choose the best cut, succeeding?

8. The time of training, the growing bond between The Butcher and Dazza, the discussions with Carver and his devotion?

9. The Frenchman, his arrogance, the back story and The Butcher wanting revenge?

10. Diane, her becoming exasperated, Dazza and his lack of awareness? The possibility promotion, going to Albury? Her making demands, no barbecues? The fact that the week was in preparation – and the week after in eating all the meat? The discovery that Dazza had to go into the competition, her ousting him? On the boat, going to the motel, the lonely men at the motel?

11. The day, the rivalries, the crowds, the cooking, the competition, the results? The sympathetic Americans and helping with the meat? The Frenchman and his horse meat, stealing the good meat from The Butcher? The desperation, the phone call to the Indian, his hurrying with the meat? The victory?

12. Jayden and his friends, their being present, rejoicing? Montana seeing the letter at home, Diane reading it – reunited with Dazza, and the end of the letter and his wanting the best for her?

13. Delivering The Butcher to Carver, his escorting her – and her remarking that it was too soon!

14. Happy ending? A light Australian suburban story?