CHARLIE CHAN IN THE SECRET SERVICE

US, 1944, 61 minutes, Black-and-white.
Sidney Toler, Manton Moreland, Arthur Loft, Gwen Kenyon, Sarah Edwards, George J.Lewis, Marianne Quon, Benson Fong, Muni Seroff, Lelah Tyler.
Directed by Phil Rosen.

This Charlie Chan mystery has a wartime setting, Charlie himself working for the government and secondment to investigate the death of a scientist who works in experimenting with bombs to destroy U-boats and Japanese Navy. The scientist is seen in his laboratory, guarded by two Secret Service men, putting his plans in his pocket, going down to drinks with guests and then mysteriously killed.

All the action except for the government offices and the scene where Charlie Chan’s daughter and son arrive is in the scientist’s mansion, his laboratory, the downstairs reception where everybody is gathered.

The context is international espionage and suspicions about a German agent.

There are quite a number of suspicious characters including some Latin Americans, one of them a politician in a wheelchair, his sister and an associate. There is also a businessman who looks very obviously suspicious and acts like this. There is also a flighty society woman, getting things mixed up – and the introduction of Birmingham Brown, Manton Moreland, who works for her and, as we know, went to work for Charlie Chan and appeared in many films over the coming two years. His performance, always fearful, bug-eyed, seem to be popular at the time but now would seem to be rather politically incorrect.

Tommy Chan is present again, getting into all kinds of trouble, as does his sister. He also gets into trouble with Birmingham Brown – a sign of future films as well.

The method of killing is rather ingenious, electric current through a light switch, leaving few clues. There is also a gun, hidden, triggered by a magnet. These are both used twice to try to kill Charlie Chan himself.

The businessman is revealed as an associate of the International spy and is short so that he will not reveal anything. Charlie Chan does a setup to reveal the true criminal – and, as in some of the previous films, the irritating ditzy female character turns out to be the master spy.

Quite interesting and entertaining – and a joke at the end where Birmingham Brown is trying to get more employment but requires a letter of commendation from his previous employer!




CHARLIE CHAN FILMS

Charlie Chan was the creation of novelist Earl Deer Biggers, creator of the popular novel Seven Keys to Baldpate (adapted for the stage in the early 20th century and the plot of many films of the same name and variations). Biggers saw the beginning of the popularity of the films of Charlie Chan in the silent era but died at the age of 48 in 1933, just as the series with Warner Land was becoming more popular.

20th Century Fox was responsible for the early Charlie Chan films with Warner Oland and gave them more prestigious production values than many of the short supporting features of the time. After Oland’s death, Fox sold the franchise to Monogram Pictures with Sidney Toler in the central role. They were less impactful than the early films. There were some films later in the 1940s with Roland Winters in the central role.

The films generally ran for about 71 minutes, and similarities in plots, often a warning to Charlie Chan to leave a location, his staying when murders are committed, displaying his expertise in thinking through situations and clues. He generally collaborates with the local police who, sometimes seem, characters, but ultimately are on side.

Warner Oland was a Swedish actor who came with his family to the United States when he was a child. Some have commented that for his Chinese appearance he merely had to adjust his eyebrows and moustache to pass for Chinese – even in China where he was spoken to in Chinese. And the name, Charlie Chan, became a common place for reference to a Chinese. In retrospect there may have been some racial stereotype in his presentation but he is always respectful, honouring Chinese ancestors and traditions. Charlie Chan came from Honolulu.

Quite a number of the film is Keye Luke appeared as his son, very American, brash in intervening, make mistakes, full of American slang (and in Charlie Chan in Paris mangling French). Luke had an extensive career in Hollywood, his last film was in 1990 been Woody Allen’s Alice and the second Gremlins film.

Quite a number of character actors in Hollywood had roles in the Charlie Chan films, and there was a range of directors.

Oland had a portly figure and the screenplay makes reference to this. His diction is precise and much of the screenplay is in wise sayings, aphorisms, which are especially enhanced by the omission of “the� and “a� in delivery which makes them sound more telling and exotic.

There was a Charlie Chan film the late 1970s, Charlie Chan and the Dragon Queen with Peter Ustinov in the central role.

DARK ALIBI

US, 1946, 61 minutes, Black-and-white.
Sidney Toler, Manton Moreland, Ben Carter, Benson Fong, Teala Loring, George Holmes, Russell Hicks.
Directed by Phil Karlson.

Dark Alibi is one of the last Charlie Chan films with Sidney Toler. It was released the year before he died.

Charlie Chan is visiting and becomes involved out of sympathy with the young woman whose father has been convicted of bank robbery and who is about to be executed. The film opened with the bank robbery and the arrest of the father who stated been locked in a building for hours. Then his fingerprints are found at the scene of the crime. He is tried, the evidence all against him, found guilty. The public defender is unable to help because of the evidence.

Charlie Chan visits the house, assembles all the people In there – plenty of suspects. The daughter is also helped by a personable young prison guard.

Manton Moreland is on hand again with his back comedy, looking somewhat inappropriate – and he also has one of those conversations, as in previous films, with comedian Ben Carter where each of them talks filling in the conversation without the detail being explicit, much to the puzzle of Tommy Chan, Benson Fong once again. As usual, Manton Moreland as Birmingham Brown is continually afraid, Tommy Chan intervening and getting the two into trouble, including in the prison, wrongly suspicious of two convicts, trapped in their cell – with one of them admiring Charlie Chan who convicted him and wanting to shake his hand!

The prison warden, Russell Hicks, is cooperative. What emerges is that there has been tampering with reproducing fingerprints, consulting with experts, working out how it could be done, a young woman who lived in the boarding house having a connection with one of the convicts, and, in a final revelation, the personable young warden being identified as part of the crime set up.

Some of the other members of the household are also involved, a talkative travelling salesman as well as the manager of a theatrical warehouse – who is also murdered.

CHRISTOPHER ROBIN

UK, 2018, 104 minutes, Colour.
Ewan Mc Gregor, Hayley Atwell, Brontë Carmichael, Mark Gattis, Oliver Ford Davies. Voices of: Jim Cummings, Brad Garrett, Sophie Okonedo, Peter Capaldi, Toby Jones.
Directed by Marc Forster.

There has been quite some cinema interest in the life and writings of the British A.A.Milne, his experience of World War I, rather shell-shocked, his coping and not coping, his relationship with his wife, a rather dominating presence, and his love for his son, Christopher Robin. And Milne created a location, a Hundred Acre forest inhabited by a range of characters who from the 1920s endeared themselves to British children and then to children worldwide. The main character, so well-known, is the toy bear, Winnie the Pooh.

This was all the subject of the 2017 film, Goodbye Christopher Robin, with Domnhall Gleeson as Milne and Margot Robbie as his wife. The end of that film did move into World War II and some of the experiences of Christopher Robin.

Here we are again in Milne country. However, the focus is on Christopher Robin himself. We are introduced to the boy and Winnie the Pooh and the other characters as they farewell Christopher Robin and his leaving home. This gives the audience the chance to look at and, especially, listen to the voices of the range of characters from Eeyore, Rabbit, Piglet, Kanga, Roo, Owl… Jim Cummings is especially convincing, in the low key voice and delivery, as Pooh.

But, the main action takes place after the end of the war in which Christopher Robin served. He is married, has a daughter, still lives in the family house outside London but is hard at work doing efficiency jobs for a luggage company. He is busy, over-worked, taking the job home with him, not spending enough time with his wife and daughter as he should.

This, of course, is reminiscent of those many films about the busy father and his neglect of family and the need for his eyes and heart to be opened. In fact, a film that comes to mind from a quarter of a century earlier is Steven Spielberg’s Hook. In this film it is Peter Pan who is caught up in the busy adult world gets the opportunity to go back to Neverland and discover his inner child.

Ewan Mc Gregor is Christopher Robin. Sitting in the forest one day he is approached by Pooh – rather irritating in his insistence on wanting honey and having stomach rumbles! But he tantalises Christopher, accompanies him on his travels to work, is prone to get lost, wants some more honey but, for a time, is contented with a red balloon. Because Christopher needs to get his homework done for the company, he takes Pooh back to the Hundred Acre forest and, rather impatiently and irritably at first, meets again all those old friends.

While this is the story of Pooh and the others, it is also the story of Christopher Robin and his daughter, his encounter with her, frantically travelling to London with her father’s briefcase and his papers, an amusing but disastrous taxi ride, with the others being bounced about in a box banging the London streets.

The ending is never in doubt. It is just the interest in the way in which it will happen, Christopher Robin getting a brainwave about how to improve the luggage business. (Answer, create opportunities where everybody can go on holidays not just the wealthy, and they will all buy luggage!). And there is an amusing song with everybody at the beach during the final credits highlighting this.

(For those who were introduced to Winnie the Pooh’s world as children, the film would be most engaging. For those who were not, it may (as for this reviewer) take rather a long time to get used to characters who had not been endearing from childhood.)

1. The popularity of the stories by A.A.Milne? The characters from the Hundred Acres, Winnie the Pooh, Piglet, Eeyore, Kanga, Rabbit, Roo, Owl?

2. Response of audiences who were introduced to the characters as children, their charm, joy of seeing them again? The contrast with those not familiar with the characters from childhood? How attractive at first glance in this story?

3. The opening, the farewell to Christopher Robin? His age? The range of characters, the celebration?

4. The period after World War II? London, companies, luggage? Offices, work? The pressures on the workers, the bid for efficiency, for profits? Christopher Robin and the war experiences, his work and supporting his family? The effect on his wife, on his daughter?

5. The pressures of work, Christopher Robin in the park, the presence of Pooh? The conversations? Christopher Robin and his having forgotten his childhood and the characters?

6. Pooh, the comment about his not being bright, his being hungry, stomach rumblings, wanting only? The ingenuous remarks? The effect on Christopher, the pressure of the son of the boss, his working on the plans? Going to the station, Pooh wanting the balloon, losing Pooh at the station, finding him, getting on the train, working in the carriage, excluding other travellers?

7. Journey back to the house, his wife’s response, seeing his daughter, her disappointment at his being away?

8. Going back to the woods, getting stuck in the tree trunk, the fear of the other characters, fearing that he was a half-full up, his going to the woods, falling in the trap? The other characters emerging, your and his being pessimistic and rather indolent, the island’s comments, Room, Piglet?

9. Christopher and his reminiscences, starting to place the characters, the past relationship? His needing to get back to work, his explanation of his briefcase, the irony of its being emptied? Passing the house, Evelyn and her comments, his hurrying to the train?

10. Madeleine, upset, her encounter with the characters, wanting to get the briefcase to her father? The carriage, the characters, in the train, travelling through London, the taxi and the bewilderment in the accident, in the box, the box banging on the street? Evelyn in pursuit in the car? The characters landing on the car?

11. Christopher, going to the meeting, the head and his demands, his son and his snide remarks, Evelyn arriving, hurrying and finding Madeleine, the papers all distributed? One page left, his getting the insight?

12. Going to the office, the explanation about holidays, more holidaymakers, the need for luggage? The head of the company and his affirmation, doing nothing to get something! His rebuking his son?

13. Pooh, his involvement, the contribution of the others? The family returning home, Christopher Robin learning his lesson, going out into the woods and the celebration?

BEAST

UK, 2017, 107 minutes, Colour.
Jesse Buckley, Johnny Flynn, Geraldine James.
Directed by Michael Pearce.

Certainly, a blunt and frightening title.

This might be described as a psychological horror film, not of the blood and gore type, the sense of this is implied rather than visualised, but a study of character, of characters, of their potential for being beasts.

The setting is the island of Jersey, attractive locations of beach, cliffs, villages. But, very soon into the opening of the film, we see memorials to young women who have been killed. It seems that over the years there have been a number of abductions and murders, wariness about a serial killer. This is the background to the story of Moll (a quite intense performance by Jessie Buckley), a young woman who lives with her mother, sings in the choir which is conducted by her mother, is a tourist guide for busloads of visitors to Jersey. But, we appreciate immediately that there is quite some edge to Moll.

As we learn more about Moll, the demands made on her by her mother, a powerful performance by Geraldine James, we find that she was homeschooled after a violent incident, allegedly bullying of Moll and her response with a pair of scissors. Her mother wants to make sure that all the evil is removed from her daughter. To that end she throws a lavish party but her sister one-ups her by announcing the she is pregnant with twins. Moll is also required to babysit her brother’s daughter whom she likes but sometimes forgets as she goes out, her mother making her confess to selfishness.

She has a wild side too, going to parties and dances. But, near a cave on the beach, she is rescued from an aggressive young man by a local, Pascal (Johnny Flynn). She is immediately attracted to him. He is a handyman, poacher, has been in prison, is quite direct in talking to Moll’s mother.

The immediate drama in the story is that there was an abduction and murder on the night of Moll’s party. A local Portuguese migrant is suspected. But what about Pascal and his past? And what about Moll and her inner violence?

The director has made the point that this film is not so much an investigation into the abductions and murders, certainly the work of a killer with beastly instincts, but it is more of an investigation into the psyche of Moll, her attraction towards Pascal, whether she is suspicious of him or not, whether her love for him is dangerous because of her suspicions.

Because of this, Beast is an interesting psychological portrait of a disturbed young woman, her alienation from her family (making a toast at one stage to her family and declaring that she forgives them), her somewhat reckless love for the mysterious Pascal.

1. The title, the characters, behaviour? Death, anger and brutality?

2. The island of Jersey, the beaches and the cliffs, the homes, the work in the fields, church, fates? Life on the island? The musical score?

3. The atmosphere, the beach, the cliffs, climbing the cliffs, the memorials to the dead girls? The choir?

4. Moll’s story, the images of the whales, later images of hunting, poaching and the dead rabbits? Molly and her self-age, her appearance, red hair, clothes? The relationship with her mother, in the choir, her mother’s demands? The father and his senility? Her brother and his daughter, her having to care for the niece? Her birthday party, the sister’s comeuppance with news of her fiance and twins? Her leaving, going to the dancing, wild, the young man molesting her in the cave, Pascal arriving and shooting? Riding with him, attracted to him, his coming to the house to do the work, his frank manner of talking to her mother? Her past, the girl, the attack with the scissors? Her mother withdrawing her from school, home schooling, wanting to be friends with her daughter? Moll and her guide with the tourists in the bus? Moll going to drives with Pascal, neglecting her niece, her mother reprimanding her, her brother’s harshness? Pascal and his presence, the meals, her love for him, the sexual encounter, his wearing the black jeans, the dress code and his being ousted? The toast to her family and saying she forgave them? Her moving out?

5. The visualising of her nightmares, the stabbing with the scissors, the masked intruders, the smashing the windows, indication of her disturbed state?

6. The local policeman, his attachment to her, his presence at the party, the child abducted and murdered at the time of the party, his interrogation of Moll, her lie, her resisting him, her adverse comment on his smell? Later going back, angry with Pascal, telling the policeman she lied?

7. Moving out of home, moving in with Pascal, the relationship? The police telling her that he was under suspicion, the past offences, his explanations, his time in prison? His mother abandoning him? Their outings together, drinking, asking him to go away to a hot climate, his drunken reaction, attempting to strangle her, her leaving, burying herself in the dirt, changing into the white dress, the apology? At the restaurant? The two being alike, the accusation, in the car, loosening his seatbelt, deliberately crashing the car, his getting out and crawling along the road, Moll getting out, chasing him, choking him, lying beside him?

8. Her visiting the shop, the girl with the scissors’ wound, the truth about her revenge, her being denounced by the girl? The effect on Moll – at her screaming sequences?

9. The men working the field, the discoveries of the body, crime site? The men and their brutality towards Bruno? Pascal defending him?

10. Moll’s mother, strict, conducting the choir, the demands on her daughter, arranging the party, wanting friendship, the past, wanting the evil out of her daughter, her severity, homeschooling, her anger at Moll leaving her niece, the reprimands? The meal, her reaction to Moll toasting the family and forgiving them? The contrast with her father, at home, quiet, growing senility?

11. The victims, the memorials, the ceremony in the church, the preaching, the grief, Moll coming to the church, the hostile man wanting her out, her embracing the mother, the mother’s harsh reaction?

12. Public opinion, the news items, Moll and her association with Pascal, the television news items, the media at the door?

13. The director saying that the film was not an investigation into the murders but rather an investigation into Moll, her character, whether she thought Pascal was the murderer or not, her love for him despite this, because of this, and the similarities in herself?

AFTERMATH

US, 2017, 94 minutes, Colour.
Arnold Schwarzenegger, Scoot Mc Nairy, Maggie Grace, Judah Lawson, Martin Donovan, Kevin Zeegers.
Directed by Elliot Lester.

Aftermath announces that is based on a true story. The aftermath of the title indicates the period after an accidental plane crash and its effect on a husband who lost his wife and daughter, on the air traffic controller and his sense of responsibility and guilt, the consequences for his wife and son.

Audiences who know Arnold Schwarzenegger from his action films would be very surprised at his serious performance here, restrained and brooding in grief, finally bursting out in anger. It is a very serious role, none of his previous actions styles or dark humour. Scoot Mc Nairy is good as the air traffic controller, difficulties in the control room, technical difficulties, his not paying full attention with disastrous consequences. He is married with a son.

The film shows the immediate aftermath, the father brooding with his grief, wanting an apology from the airline company but their simply offering a financial contract. The air traffic controller has difficulties with his wife and son, does not want psychological counselling but a prescription, takes drugs but cannot take his life.

The film moves to a year later, the father continuing manual jobs, the air traffic controller with another name working as a travel consultant. The father gets a journalist to give him the controller’s address and there is a final confrontation, and a jolting surprise as the father slits the controller’s throat – in the presence of his wife and son.

And then 10 years pass, the father serving his time in jail, being released, going to the cemetery and to the graves, the controller son following him, threatening him with the gun – but unable to follow through. The rest and the aftermath is left to the emotions and imagination of the audience.

1. Based on a true story? The plausibility of the air controller’s error? The response of the families to those who have died in the crash? The interlinking of the lives?

2. The titles on the introduction to both Roman and Jacob?

3. Roman, his work on the building site, skills, thoroughness, reputation, hard work? Looking forward to the arrival of his wife and daughter, her pregnancy? The boss, persuading him to take time off? The flowers, going to the airport, asking questions, in the waiting room, the news, his being stunned, the offer of help? Alone at home? His continued brooding and its taking possession of him?

4. Jacob, his wife, his son, ordinary life? Going to work, air traffic control? The basics of the work, getting a cup of coffee, the technicians coming in, the phones not working, his going to the other phone, taking his headphones on and off? Not hearing the request? Looking at the line of the two planes, the disappearance, the crash? The consequences?

5. The title of the film and its application to Roman and to Jacob and his family?

6. Roman’s story, unable to let go, the discussions with his boss, home movies, the photos? The encounter with the authorities from the airline, the lawyers and their harshness, the nature of the contract, the emphasis on money? Roman saying that no one had said sorry? Forcing the lawyer to look at his photo? Walking out?

7. Jacob, overcome, wondering about how many had died? The discussions with the authorities, their sympathy and support? At home, the tension, his son, his wife, watching the television news, the dispute about making breakfast? The authorities, the discussion about the severance pay, moving, changing his name, another job? The reaction of his wife?

8. The year later, Roman and his work on the fence and being praised, but still brooding? The journalists and the interrogations? Asking the journalist to find Jacob’s address, her bringing it to him, in the diner? His visit to the apartment, Jacob’s reaction, wanting to call the police, Roman’s slitting his throat? Is Lying on the floor dying, the blood? His wife coming in, his son? Roman showing Jacob the photo and wanting an apology?

9. The year later, Jacob, the new name, working as a travel consultant, going to his apartment, the initial despair, the psychologist, wanting the prescription, the pills, bringing them up? His wife’s arrival, his son? Roman at the door, the photo, wanting to call the police, his death?

10. Roman, going to jail, the discussions with the authorities, his having to go to psychological sessions?

11. The release, going to the cemetery, his previous visit to the cemetery, even spending the night with the caretaker asking him to leave? His being followed by Jacob’s son?
The confrontation, the gun at his head, Roman ready to die? The boy unable to shoot Roman? His sitting with his grief? Roman leaving?

12. The future for each of them?

GENERAL NIL

Poland, 2009, 125 minutes, Colour.
Olgierd Lucaszewicz.
Directed by Ryszard Bugajski.

This tribute is rather late in coming. It is a 21st-century look back at the resistance in Poland in World War II and the subsequent Communist regime and its harshness.

General Nil was the codename for Emile Fieldorf who commanded the resistance forces. Early in the film we see the assassination of a German officer. We see the role of General Nil, allegedly a railway worker, but making all kinds of contacts, receiving instructions from Poles in England. He lives a dangerous life.

The first part of the film is rather episodic, indications of particular events from 1944 to 1950. We learn that Fieldorf was arrested because he had a great deal of currency and was considered a profiteer, served time in a Gulag in Siberia, returned to Warsaw, made himself known to the authorities, reconciled with his wife and family from whom he had been separated for so long, was advised to go to England, but accepted what was happening in Poland.

However, vengeful authorities resented him, arrested him, tortured him, executed him, buried him in an unknown spot. At the end of the 20th century his reputation was vindicated and here is a film tribute to him.

1. A significant Polish film? A significant Polish subject? World War II? The resistance to the Nazis? Imprisonment in Siberia? Arrests, rigged trials, executions?

2. The Polish settings, the 1940s, Warsaw, the countryside? The trains from Siberia? The Communist regime after World War II? Homes, offices, courts, prisons? Executions? The musical score?

3. The status of the central character? His German name? His nickname during the war? His command? The resistance members? Their activities? Initial scene of the assassination of the German officer in the streets, the German response, the resistance members, death?

4. The structure of the film: the glimpses of activity during the 1940s, the trip back from Siberia and the flashbacks? The general and his activities during the war? His contacts, orders from England? The patriotic followers? The background of his marriage, away from his wife, her later criticisms, her forgiving him, his asking forgiveness? The sketches of activities from 1944, 1945, 1947 and to the beginning of the 1950s? Building up a picture of the central character, his experiences, Communist rule in Poland?

5. The personality of the general, his command during the war? Accused of being profiteering, his arrest, sent to Siberia? His return? His collapse? Going to Helena for some help? Reunited with his wife and daughters, the granddaughter? His woodwork, his previous cover as a railway worker? His friends urging him to go abroad? His decision to stay?

6. His decision to go to the authorities, explaining who he was, the reactions? His friends, those in the government and their advice? The emissary from London, going to the sanatorium where his friend worked, the discussions in the mountains? This being brought up later in his trial?

7. The suddenness of his arrest, imprisonment, treatment, water in the cell? The interrogations, the brutality, the demands? The other prisoners in the cell, being taken at random, the interrogations, the man brutalised and his fingernails cut? His later testimony in the trial? Coached responses?

8. The general, his interrogation, standing firm? His wife and daughters urging him to make an appeal for reprieve? The reaction of the president, the audience with the children, his casual at attitude, refusing the reprieve?

9. The general, taken from the cell, march to the gallows, no blindfold, the execution? His body taken, thrown into a pit with other bodies, the lime poured over them?

10. The later explanations, his vindication in later decades, acknowledgement of his heroism, his burial place and never discovered? This film as a tribute?

MARK FELT: THE MAN WHO BROUGHT DOWN THE WHITE HOUSE

US, 2017, 103 minutes, Colour.
Liam Neeson, Diane Lane, Marton Csokas, Tony Goldwyn, Ike Barinholtz, Josh Lucas, Kate Walsh, Brian d'Arcy James, Maika Monroe , Michael C.Hall, Tom Sizemore, Julian Morris, Bruce Greenwood, Noah Wyle.
Directed by Peter Landesman.

Film audiences have long been familiar with the story of Carl Bernstein and Bob Woodward and their contacts with the unknown informant, Deep Throat. The film version of All the Presidents Men was released in 1976. In subsequent decades, there have been many films about Richard Nixon, including Oliver Stone’s portrait starring Anthony Hopkins, many films about J.Edgar Hoover, The Secret Files as well as Clint Eastwood’s portrait.

For those who lived through the period or are knowledgeable about it, this is a most interesting film. For those for whom the American politics of the 1970s are unfamiliar, it may lack interest and may seem rather tedious.

However, Liam Neeson gives an interesting performance as Mark Felt, a deputy to Hoover for over 30 years in the FBI, extremely loyal, who was pushed aside by the Nixon administration, was suspicious about the Watergate break-in and continued to pursue the investigation even when orders from the White House came to contain it. Felt secretly made contact with various journalists, especially Bob Woodward, giving him the information and being called Deep Throat. He kept this secret until some years before his death 30 years later.

The film has a strong cast, especially with dramatising Mark Felt’s aides, as well as the advisers to Nixon himself (who is seen in newsreel footage).

In 2018, Stephen Spielberg released a very interesting film about the role of the Washington post in the Pentagon Papers as well as the expose of Watergate. The present film serves as an interesting connection, along with All the President’s Men. Former journalist, Peter Landesman, directed Parkland, the Kennedy assassination film, and the sport's film with Will Smith, Concussion.


1. Memories of American politics in the 1970s? Audience knowledge of the events, personalities? Perspective for against? The impact for younger audiences?

2. A true story, American politics, the 1970s, the role of Richard Nixon, his associates? The election of 1972? The Watergate break-in? The role of the Washington Post, the information from Deep Throat?

3. The film based on the book by Mark Felt? The objectivity of the book and his perspective?

4. Washington DC, the views, Capitol Hill, the White House, the FBI buildings, offices, homes, parking areas, diners? The musical score?

5. Liam Neeson is Mark Felt, his age, gaunt? 30 years with the FBI, his loyalties, to J Edgar Hoover? His wife, love, yet the distance, the secrecy of his job? The discussions? His going home to her after the difficulties at the office? Joan, growing up, her father’s care for her, her mother’s seeming distance? The disappearance, the many letters he sent out, the return to sender, his investigations, finding her?

6. The sense of the presence of Hoover, his career, for many decades, his interactions with the politicians, the role of the FBI and the G-men? His files, spying on people, his hold over politicians and others? The suddenness of his death? The destruction of the files? Felt role? His expectations?

7. The 1970s, the Vietnam war, Nixon’s first term, his background as VP? His reputation? Working for re-election, his committee, his officials, the demands on the FBI, Felt refusing to give the documents? The various jurisdictions, the CIA, FBI, their independence, discussion about the celebration option’s funeral? The atmosphere?

8. Bill Sullivan, will FBI, leaving, security, his return, links with the White House, his wanting revenge?

9. Grey, his role of the FBI, interactions with Felt, his links with the White House, the style, his speeches, the information going on, the liaison’s, the demands? The hostility towards Phelps? The hearings, his trusting Felt, telling the truth, is losing his job after the hearings?

10. John Dean and the other White House officials, their personalities, intrigue, interviews with Felt, the commands, Felt explaining about the files and the information available?

11. The signalling of the days to the election, the atmosphere of 1972, the drama, unfolding, the television footage of Nixon?

12. Bolt, his character, abiding by the law, administering the law in the FBI way, is a loyalties, the characters of his two assistants, confiding in the? The other members of the team, the issue of leaks, his stances and behaviour?

13. Felt and his interviews with the journalist, the diner, giving the information, knowing the consequences, wanting the stories published? The contact with Bob Woodward, the description of Deep Throat? The phone calls, the visits, the leaks, secrecy, the effect?

14. The FBI and the CIA, the liaison of the discussion about secrecy? Grey giving Felt 48 hours to wind up the Watergate case? The FBI being silenced? The reaction to the media articles? Grey asking who the leak was? The suspicions and pointing the finger at suspects in the office?

15. The election success? The seeming forgetting of the Watergate issues? Felt continuing, his motivations, loyalty to?

16. Finding Joan, his discussions with his wife, the visit, mother and daughter talking, the party and the reconciliation?

17. The Washington Post, the information, Nixon resigning, the scenes of his leaving?

18. Felt, the hearing, giving orders to spy on various groups, the Weather protesters? His taking responsibility? Leaving the FBI, Reagan giving him a pardon, his life after the FBI? Finally writing the book, revealing the truth? His death?

19. His significance for American politics, government? (And this film released in the early years of the trunk era?

McQUEEN

UK, 2018, 111 minutes, Colour.
Directed by Ian Bonhoite, Peter Ettedgui.

No, not Steve Mc Queen the actor nor Steve Mc Queen the British Oscar-winning director (12 Years a Slave). This is another Englishman, Lee Alexander M cQueen, fashion designer.

There seems to be something of a run on documentaries about fashion designers, films in recent years about Coco Chanel, Yves St Laurent, Gianni Versace, The Gospel according to Andre, Westwood, and this documentary about Mc Queen who established is own company, worked for Givenchy for several years…

Obviously, this is a film for fashion aficionados (enthusiastic afashionados). A lot of background about Mc Queen and his abilities, his imagination, his workshop and assistants, his knowledge of materials, fabrics,, of design. There is a lot of footage on the variety of shows, sometimes many shows a year from the late 1980s to 2010. A lot of the footage comes from workshops but even more from performance on a variety of catwalks.

But, for those not so interested in fashion for those who do not understand the variety of trends and themes and how they are embodied sometimes in costumes which seem outlandish? There is his biography, the portrait of an artist and his eccentricities, a man who was driven, a man who could not take it any more, especially after the death of his mother.

So, for this kind of audience, a study in the psychology of a talented, creative but strange man.

There is a lot of footage of Mc Queen himself explaining himself, his family background, comments from his mother, a great number of comments from his sister who had a brutal husband who was also abusive towards Mc Queen. He lacked interest in school. He liked to draw, design. And, in his early 20s not only did he receive encouragement, he was given opportunities to study, to go into practice, to achieve. To many he was likable. For others he was difficult. He was very mannered – and, over 20 years, he developed a persona that seemed often inconsistent, chubby at one stage, slimmed down at another, different styles of clothes, hair, bald. He was also a gay man – and two men with whom he had strong relationships also give their testimony. Ultimately, he contracted AIDS.

But, the psychological study is immersed in his designs, his flair for fabrics, talent for colours, the intensity of his designs, choosing of themes from history, mythology. It has been mentioned, he was persuaded to work for Givenchy for several years. However, he built up his own company.

There is enough in the documentary for audiences to be able to speculate on what Mc Queen’s underlying demons were and, how they affected him by the age of 40 and drove him to take his own life.

The style of the film is quite exotic, the style of photography very much in the fashion world vein, design, colours, angles – so that the audience, even despite itself, is drawn into Mc Queen’s special world.

WON’T YOU BE MY NEIGHBOR?

US, 2018, 97 minutes, Colour.
Directed by Morgan Neville.

A genial question for a title. This is the story of Fred Rogers, a Pittsburgh man, intending to be a Minister for the Presbyterian Church, fascinated by television, establishing a children’s program which ran for decades, becoming a Minister, being a significant person in the lives of many children as well as adults.

This is a review – and it is followed by a reflection, a disturbing reflection about our attitudes towards people today, especially suspicions and wariness.

As a film, this is very engaging. Fred Rogers is dead but he lives on in so many images from his program as well as interviews from his life throughout the decades. His show was very simple. No elaborate sets. He voiced various characters, especially a small puppet called Daniel became something of his alter ego throughout the programs. He was assisted at various times by producers and set assistants who are very strong in their memories and praise of him.

He was very much an entertainer of his times, especially in the decade of Civil Rights and Vietnam, courageous enough to raise serious issues for his audience, the nature of war, the reality of mothers and fathers falling out of love and separating. He was also an advocate of Civil Rights and the place of African-Americans?, incorporating a singer, François Clemmons, into his stories – symbolised by a sequence where it is a hot day and he has his feet in a tub of water, hosing them and he invites the African-American? policeman to join him to cool his feet, no segregation even in cooling off on hot day. (The actor-singer was a gay man, something Fred Rogers did not realise but retained the friendship and supported him even advising him not to make this public at the time.)

There are some very heartwarming sequences in the film, his ease in mixing with the smallest of children, making them welcome, a boy confined to a wheelchair enjoying singing with him (and later, as an adult, coming on stage and a tribute).

The various commentators, including his wife and son, speculate on the childlike simplicity of Fred Rogers’ attitude towards people and life, his recognition of goodness, and his statement of being true to the best in ourselves.

And the reflection?

In recent decades, with the revelations of abusive behaviour of adults towards children, of grooming, many of us are automatically on the alert, suspicious of adults and the behaviour towards children. In fact, at some stages, this happened to Fred Rogers. Critics, journalists, singled out his philosophy of being happy with whom one really is and stating that this led to a spoilt generation adults who are self-satisfied, unwilling to do anything for others. And then, there were some sexual implications, rumour-mongering that he was a gay man and casting aspersions on his role as a television personality for children.

This is the world we have come to live in, revelations of the abuse of children, authorities wanting to do their best to safeguard children – which has led to almost a guilty until proven innocent attitude towards those who do good in society (a consequence of disillusionment with so many abusive clergy of the different denominations and different religions).

This is a reality, but it is a pity. This documentary, with its warmth and charm, shows Fred Rogers was a good man.

IN LIKE FLYNN

Australia, 2018, 97 minutes, Colour.
Thomas Cocquerel, Cory Large, William Moseley, Clive Standen, Callan Mulvey, David Wenham, David Hennessey, Isabel Lucas, Grace Huang, Costas Mandylor, Lochlyin Munro, Dan Fogler.
Directed by Russell Mulcahy.

Is Errol Flynn household name? The phrase which is the title of the film has entered into the English language, a linguistic memorial, so to speak, to Errol Flynn. So, it depends on knowledge of and/or interest in Flynn as to how engaging this film is.

For those in the know, Errol Flynn was from Tasmania and in his 20s lived an adventurous life. And this is the subject of this film, Errol Flynn before Hollywood and international success.

The screenplay gets down to things instantly. Here is Flynn leading a small expedition, travelling into almost-forbidden territory along Papua New Guinea’s Sepik River, locals working with him as carriers and guides, but a Hollywood producer with his cameraman trying to get exotic footage. They get more than they bargained for, painted headhunters attack them; they go beyond forbidden boundaries, decapitated heads, parts of bodies hanging from the trees, more than a touch of blood and gore, arrows, wounds, falling over cliffs, finally escaping the deadly dangers.

This gives something of the flavour of Flynn’s story, the cheeky Australian, mentioning that he is son of a professor, wandering the world, drinking, the touch of womanising, plenty of brawls and fights (some of which would describe his subsequent life, especially leading up to his untimely death in 1959). Thomas Cocquerel makes for a handsome and active, a potential swashbuckler.

The main part of this film is action and adventure, Flynn and his friend Rex (Corey Large), a bare knuckle fighter, going to an opium den, being drugged, but Flynn stealing the sailing boat from these Chinese pirates in Sydney. Flynn and Rex are bound fool New Guinea again, seeking gold. They are joined by a friend who has the touch of the top, Duke, and Charlie, who originally owned the boat which was captured by the Chinese pirates.

They sail up the coast of New South Wales and Queensland, bond between themselves, find themselves in Townsville which is being run by an absolute rogue who has all kinds of business interests, setting up illegal knuckle fights, serving as religious Minister on Sundays (with David Wenham playing him all stops out).

So, more fistfights, Flynn meeting an old girlfriend, Rose (Isabel Lucas) who ultimately out-Flynn’s Flynn. They escape, make their way to New Guinea but don’t quite arrive there. Flynn’s alternative? To remember the offer from the Hollywood producer, try his luck, go to Los Angeles where we see him filming Captain Blood with Olivia Haviland (though he had appeared in five films and two shorts before this). Up on the screen comes a close-up of Blood and Olivia and the caption The End. The end of this film – but, the beginning for Errol Flynn who achieved instant success and popularity, top Hollywood presence during the 1930s and 1940s, declining in the 1950s to his death.

A pity that this film doesn’t show Errol Flynn’s performance for Charles Chauvel in the semi-documentary In The Wake of the Bounty where he plays, rather woodenly and giving no indication of future screen career and presence, Fletcher Christian. The screenplay is based on Flynn’s book Beam Ends – where, perhaps, he did not mention Chauvel’s film and his performance, preferring the Hollywood image.

1. The title? The use of the saying? Based on Errol Flynn?

2. Audience knowledge of Errol Flynn, his background, Australia, Hollywood, his career?

3. Papua New Guinea, the 1930s, the Subic River? The mountains? Sydney, the bare knuckle fights, the opium dens? The boat? The sequences at sea? Townsville, the walls, the fights? The ocean and the reef? The musical score?

4. The introduction, the Hollywood producer and cameraman, in the Sepik area, wanting film at any cost, the encounter with the headhunters, the dead bodies, continued filming, the wounds, the cliff, the attendant and his being saved by Flynn, Flynn being saved by him? The dangers, the action adventure? The escape? The offer for him to come to Hollywood?

5. Flynn and his background, no explanations, the mention that his father was a professor? The desire to find gold in Papua New Guinea? His friendship with Rex, Rex and his fighting skills, joining Flynn? The opium den, the woman and the drugs, the boat, Flynn deceiving her? Taking the boat? The arrival of Duke, his background and name, Rex’s attitude towards him? The boat, the encounter with Charlie, the background of his story, the boat, the Chinese woman, the flashbacks to his wife and daughter, their picture? The preparations to sail? Their goal?

6. The characters of these adventurers, their interactions, the coin with the hole and Duke shooting it? The rivalries?

7. The episodes in Townsville, Travers, all his deals, allegedly a minister, his son with him? The corruption? The organisation of the fights, the brutality? Flynn and his fighting? His encounter with Rose, the memories of the past, the money, her betraying him?

8. The Chinese woman, arrival, wanting the boat back, the fights? Rose and the robbery?

9. The continued journey, stuck on the reef, the boat on fire, Charlie and his remaining in the boat, his death? Duke trying to rescue him, drowning?

10. Errol Flynn as an adventurer, his Australian style, In Like Flynn? Going to Hollywood, the filming of Captain Blood, The End?