DARK HABITS/ ENTRE TINIEBLAS

Spain, 1983, 114 minutes, Colour.
Cristina Sanchez Pascual, Julieta Serrano, Marisa Paredes, Carmen Maura, Manuel Zarzo.
Directed by Pedro Almodovar.

Pedro Almodovar has been the most successful Spanish director to emerge in Spain as well as on the world stage and screen after the Franco era.

He has always had a wry sense of humour, always a touch of spoof and deeper satire. Much of this concerns sexuality, coming from the director’s own homosexuality.

By the 1990s, Almodovar was a world figure in cinema, winning many awards leading to Oscars and such classics as All About My Mother and Talk to Her. Almodovar continued to make significant films in the first two decades of the 21st-century.

This one goes back to 1983, to his wilder days, to a rather lurid imagination. The setting is a convent where the nuns have significantly harsh names. There is also a mixture of the different vices in the convent, especially in lesbian relationships and manipulations of power. There is also a priest chaplain who does become involved with the nuns.

If audiences want to see a film made by a writer-director with some Catholic upbringing in a restrictive Spain and his letting loose on all kinds of imagination about nuns and what they might get up to – and beyond – this is the film to see.

1. Pedro Almodovar film? The 1980s and his reputation as an Enfant Terrible? His further career?

2. Spanish filmmaking, after the death of Franco, breaking with traditions? The role of the church? Reactions to the church? Acceptance of the church and devotions? Critique? Parody? Beyond parody? The response of religious sensibilities?

3. Realism/fantasy/spoof? The musical score? The singing, the dancing?

4. The title, the focus of nuns, wearing their habits, the dark side? Audience expectations about nuns’ behaviour? The old habits, no connection with renewal in the church after Vatican II? The number of nuns, the Superior, the community, obedience? The nuns doing their own thing, excerpts of prayer, relationship with God, celebrating the mass and the sacraments, devotions? Yet with the touch of spoof?

5. The Superior, her setting the tone, the sisters and their mission, the redemption of sinners in need? Taking the girls, the accommodation, the possibilities for reform? The nuns and their attachment to their guests?

6. The introduction of drug themes, heroin, injections, sharing drugs? The rationalisation by the nuns? The vulgar names, manure, rat, snake…? The sister who wrote the Mills and Boon stories and are wanting recognition, discussing her plots, putting down their merits? The sisters and their stories, the African connection, the picture of the Tarzan boy? Their emotions? Sexual attachments?

7. The variety of personalities, the younger nuns, their behaviour? Intensity?

8. Yolanda and her story, the bar, the police and her escape, the dealer boyfriend and his death? The other women coming to the convent? The connection with the Marquise?

9. The police, their arrival, interrogations?

10. The Superior, her attachment to Yolanda? Emotional, the concert for her feast day, her response? The dress? Yolanda going and the superior’s grief? Consoled by the nun for the final close-up?

11. The concert, the plans, the performance, the nuns and the music and singing, the exuberance, accompanying Yolanda? The priest and his presence?

12. The Marquise, the connection with the nuns, her visits and participation?

13. The priest, in the sacristy, talking with the nuns, My Fair Lady, smoking in the sacristy, smoking during the Mass, the communion, his vestments? The priest at the concert? His grey suit and shirt? The sister requesting to hear confessions? The final confession, Sister Snake, the mutual love, her talking about sewing and his learning to sew to be with her, communion, love, the responsibility of their vows? And the interruption at the confessional by the other sister?

14. The connection with Africa, the sisters going there, the report, the letters, the photo?

15. The narrative just stopping, the image with the Superior and her being consoled?

16. The trend for Almodovar films, bright colour, soap opera, spoof, melodrama?

DON'T EVER WIPE TEARS WITHOUT GLOVES

Sweden, 2012, 175 minutes, Colour.
Adam Lundgren, Adam Pallson, Bjorn Kellman, Simon J.Berger,
Directed by Simon Kaijser.

The title is a cautionary one – but also a reminder of the attitudes and behaviour at the first emerging of AIDS.

The film was made as a miniseries for Swedish television. It has a voice-over of the central character reflecting on his experience. The film can be compared with the various films about AIDS, especially from the United States in the 1980s and 1990s. It also can be compared with the French film, the award-winning BPM, Beats per Minute, the French experience of the 1980s onwards.

The film was also a portrait of a homosexual man, the strict religious background, his wanting to move out from his home, encountering other gay men in Stockholm, the beginnings of a relationship, its development, the issue of AIDS, infection, illness and death.

While the men presented are sympathetic, the film also offers material for reflection for an older generation, the parent generation, the sympathetic mother of the dying man, the reaction of the father afterwards and their preventing his lover from attending his funeral, the difficulty of dealing with AIDS, the challenge of compassion, the pervasive homophobia.

1. The title? AIDS? Doctors and nurses, care of patients, blood, tears? Their own tears and sadness? The 1980s, the aftermath? In Sweden?

2. Comparisons with other AIDS films, about sufferers, doctors, medical research, protests? In the retrospect of 2012?

3. The history of AIDS, Swedish experience, suffering, illness, deaths, funerals? Grief? Empathy from the public or not?

4. The voice-over, the older Benjamin, his opinions about Stockholm, the men gathering their, sexual permissiveness, the homosexual community, the reactions of ordinary people, ignoring the situation?

5. Rasmus, ill, hospital, dying, the graphic sequences of his suffering and death? Intercut throughout the film?

6. Benjamin and Rasmus as children, Benjamin and his Jehovah Witness family, religious, the meetings, not celebrating Christmas, a devout household? The contrast with Rasmus, his parents, out in the fields, action, tracing his name, growing up?

7. Stockholm, sexual activity, Rasmus, leaving home, leaving his parents, his life, the life in Stockholm, apartments, groups, clubs?

8. Rasmus, eager, 19, train, his aunt and the apartment, in the streets and looking at the men, the men gathering for pickups? The encounter with Paul? Rasmus and his studies, going out for pickups, the man and the encounter with the man with the cyst on his back? Gay life? Friendship with Paul, his home, friends, Christmas celebrations?

9. Benjamin, on mission, the visit to Paul, Paul’s blunt declaration about Benjamin’s homosexuality? The effect, going home, not able to admit this to his family? Sense of secrecy? His religious training? Going to the parties at Paul’s, Paul in denial about AIDS, meeting the friends, contrast at home? Meeting Rasmus? The relationship, Benjamin’s parents, his being away from home, Paul and his jokes about Jehovah Witnesses? His preparation for his speech, giving it, the decision to give up his mission? The reaction of his parents, his sister, the elders?

10. Benjamin and Rasmus, the relationship, Benjamin’s reserve? The skinny-dipping and his briefs? The others? In hospital, care, death?

11. The group of friends, their lives, their attitudes, relationships, parties, illnesses, dying and the effect?

12. The actor, with the cast, performing Chekhov? Visiting the doctor, his report? His dilemma, his decision to hang himself? His funeral?

13. The effect on Rasmus, on Benjamin, the number of deaths, increasing, going to funerals? Paul and his reactions? Paul’s own illness, funeral, the musical, theatrical?

14. Rasmus and his parents, facing the reality about their son, the reactions, going to Stockholm, the visits to the hospital, with Benjamin?

15. Benjamin and his response to Rasmus’s death, the parents not wanting him to have anything to do with the funeral, the secrecy in the town? Benjamin being hurt?

16. The older Benjamin, remembering, the parent’s death, his visit to the town, the friend welcoming him, the grief?

17. The retrospective of the experience of AIDS? In the 80s? In Sweden?

THE SQUARE

Sweden, 2017, 151 minutes, Colour.
Claes Bang, Elisabeth Moss, Dominic West, Terry Notary, Christopher Laesso.
Directed by Ruben Ostlund.

The Square won the main award at Cannes 2017. It is the work of the provocative Swedish director, Ruben Ostlund, whose initial films were somewhat experimental, arthouse films which led to wider appreciation with Involuntary and then, internationally, with Force Majeure.

This is a long film, focusing on an art manager, his character, his private life, his professional life. On the personal side, he has a chance encounter with someone who is injured and there are quite some consequences for him, especially from the son of the injured man. Some humanity is required of him.

On the professional level, he has to interact with those responsible for an art exhibition, with the journalist with whom he has a relationship. He also has to deal with potential patrons.

The title refers to an art work, a particular space, behaviour within that space.

There is a highly dramatic sequence which features on the publicity for the film, a gathering of patrons, a meal, a dramatic performance by an actor as a gorilla.

Which means then that there are many themes throughout the film, much provocation, more than enough material to reflect on.

1. Awards? The appeal to audiences? European? Beyond? The tone, the humour, the satire?

2. Swedish sensibilities, the work of the director, his irony, humour and parody, over the top? The effect?

3. Stockholm, the museum and the actual Square, apartments, apartment blocks and stairs, offices, press conferences, the Museum, exhibition spaces? The dinner? The art world?

4. The insertion of art theory, the Museum, the question about the placement of an object and becoming art or not? Art in cinema? The setup of the interviews, the technical aspects? Commercial aspects? Promotion and plans? Raising attention in 10 to 20 seconds? The video and the girl being hurt as promoting the art? The dinner, the gorilla, threatening? The actor and his performance as the gorilla?

5. The Square, the knocking down of the historic statue, creating the smaller Square, illuminated, Latin American artist, the ethos of the Square and the demand for help from anyone in the Square?

6. The credits, the people walking throughout the city, everybody preoccupied on phones, the request to save a life and nobody noticing, the girl, screaming, pursued by the killer, Christian and the man stopping him? The aftermath? Christian being robbed and not getting any help? The reaction to being robbed, the phone and the GPS, Michael at the computer tracking the location? The decision to write the letter, delivered to all the dwellers in the apartment block? 13 floors? Michael and Kristian arguing about the delivery, minding the car, the threatening men? The message to take the phone to the 7/11, collecting it, the second phone call? The boy, going to Michael, his accusations, wanting an apology, that his parents thought he was a thief? The pursuit, falling down the stairs? Confronting Christian, the arguments, ultimately Kristian phoning the boy and apologising?

7. Kristian at the centre of the story? His job, his expertise in art, his background? Administration? His apartment, his getting ready? The encounter with Dan, the interview? Flirting, the invitation to her, spending the night? His son and the story? His experience of the Square? The crowds, online, the stealing his wallet, trying to help, talking with the man, the discovery, trying to get help and everybody ignoring him? At the office, Michael, the table on the wallet? The writing of the letter, going by car, Michael staying with the car, Christian delivering the letters? The collecting of the wallet? The second message? The encounter with the boy, his determination, the accusations? His later phoning him in the sequence of his apology and his motivations?

8. The office discussions, the promotion of the exhibition, the two young men and their plans for the video? The board meeting, the man with the baby? The secretary and her eagerness? The later meeting, the idea for the advertisement, the girl and the violence?

9. Christian and his range of friends and associates, Julian, the promotion of the exhibition? Meetings?

10. The press conferences, the response of the press, Kristian on the steps, the reaction to the exhibition?

11. The significant dinner sequence, the wealthy guests, the meal, the purpose of the dinner? The arrival of the league, his connection with Art? His performance? The brute? On the tables? The confrontation of the guests, the reactions, looking away, angrily responding, his ousting some of them? The overall impact of this particular sequence?

12. Christian, the effect of the experience? The future of the exhibition?

13. The background of art, the nature of art, true art, art and pretensions, pretentious public and sponsors? And the danger of the film being pretentious in its own way?

JULIET, NAKED

US, 2018, 93 minutes, Colour.
Rose Byrne, Ethan Hawke, Chris O’ Dowd, Phil Davis,
Directed by Jesse Peretz.

This is a much nicer film than might have been anticipated. It is a romantic comedy but with a difference, not the least being that the central couple are in middle age. And, it is not always predictable. And, it is based on a novel by Nick Hornby, best known to filmgoers for versions of his High Fidelity, About a Boy, Fever Pitch. Whatever the difficulty that his central characters experience in those stories, there is always a niceness.

While there are some sequences in the US, the main action takes place in Britain, with filming around Ramsgate and Margate, attractive looks at seaside towns and the beaches.

The premise has more than a little of the ridiculous and plays this up enjoyably. Duncan and Annie have been living together for many years, mutually agree not to have children. She is the daughter of a historian in their seaside town and taking over the management of the museum he set up, continuing his legacy after he died. Duncan, on the other hand, is an enthusiastic teacher of literature at a local college.

But… he has an obsessive devotion, more than number one fan, records, posters, concert programs, memorabilia covering his walls, for an American singer who was popular in the 1990s but disappeared from sight, Tucker Crowe. Fortunately for Duncan, he can share with his fans on his website, a great deal of adulation going on. When Duncan is sent an original studio setting of one of the songs, Annie, not the least bit interested in the singer and getting more and more exasperated, posts an anonymous comment on the site. And who should respond to it, agreeing with its negativity, but the singer himself, Tucker Crowe!

Annie is played by Rose Byrne, Duncan by Chris O’ Dowd.

Because of all the posters and photos, the audience knows that Tucker Crowe is played by Ethan Hawke. Gradually, his background is filled in, the initial success, his band, a crisis concerning a daughter, his alcoholism, lost years, mixed relationships, but living on a property with his ex-wife with access to his young son (an engaging).

Tucker also has a daughter in London and he comes to London with his young son for the birth. Since the initial posting, Tucker and Andy have been involved in email correspondence, able to express their feelings online it than in reality.

Yes, Tucker does go down to the seaside town. Yes, Annie is intrigued by him and falls for him. Yes, Tucker who tends to be dishevelled and offhand, responds pleasantly even though he has a heart attack and is hospitalised. But, what about Duncan who has been beguiled by one of the teachers and abandoned Annie? How will he respond to the real Tucker Crowe? That is part of the enjoyment of the film.

In the meantime, with news in the US that Tucker has had a heart attack, the various members of his extended family turn up. And, in the town, Annie has curated an exhibition, Summer of 1964, with the insistence of the opportunist Mayor (Phil Davis). He even persuades Tucker to sing and play the piano.

No, it doesn’t work out exactly as we might have anticipated – but all the better for it and, indeed, is nicer.

1. The title? Expectations? Different?

2. The popularity of novels by Nick Hornby? Film adaptations? American-British? stories?

3. The British seaside, the beach, the town, streets and houses, the Museum, the exhibition? The contrast with the London, the Tate Museum? Hospital? And the contrast with
the American home sequences?

4. The musical score, the music of Tucker Crowe, his lyrics? From the 90s?

5. Duncan, his obsession, his room, the posters, the tapes, the concerts? His knowledge of detail? Listening to the songs? What they meant to him? His website, the fans? His relationship with Annie, her not liking Tucker Crowe, opening the tape, listening to the demo, not liking it, Duncan’s reaction? Annie posting the adverse comment on the site? Tucker and his response?

6. The introduction to Tucker, not particularly likeable, yet Ethan Hawke and his genial presence? Audiences liking him despite himself? His life, the music, as a bassist, the 90s, the band, his leaving? The groupies, his use of drinking and addiction, the birth of grace, his abandoning her, disappearance? The passing of the years? London, Lizzie and her mother? Lizzie coming to the US, the University? His twins and their mother, Jackson and his mother, ordinary life, the royalties, his work in the garden, wanting to bond with his son?

7. Lizzie, her life, the University, visiting her father, connecting with grace? Are being pregnant, going to London, giving birth, Tucker present, the musician father, his playing, abandoning Lizzie, paralleling Tucker?

8. The communication by emails, Revelation through text rather than spoken word? Tucker at this stage of his life, Annie and her relationship with Duncan, no children, working at the Museum, memory of her father, the pompous Mayor, Duncan and the approach of the teacher, coming onto him, the relationship?

9. The mayor, pompous, Summer of 64 exhibition, his ambitions, the opening, his speeches, celebrating Tucker, inviting him to play?

10. Tucker arriving in London, the appointment at the Tate, his heart attack, hospital? Everybody coming from America, the extended family, the chaos? Any observing? Leaving, but bonding with Jackson?

11. Tucker and his recuperation, going to the town, the home, Jackson and the sharks, the beach? The encounter with Duncan on the beach, his reaction, the visit, wanting to check Tucker’s passport? The meal, the outpouring of his feelings about Tucker, Tucker’s reaction?

12. The bond between Tucker and Annie, Annie in Jackson, her wanting children? Duncan and wanting a reconciliation?

13. Annie, the beginnings of a sexual encounter, Jackson interrupting? The lost opportunity? The year passing, the communication between the two, coming to London, meeting again, the future?

THE MERGER

Australia, 2018, 94 minutes, Colour.
Damian Callinan, Kate Mulvaney, John Howard, Fayssal Bazzi, Rafferty Grierson, Josh Mc Conville, Nick Cody, Penny Cook, Angus Mc Laren, Sahil Saluja, Harry Tseng, Ben Knight..
Directed by Mark Grentell.

Beyond the city of Wagga Wagga, there is the town of Bodgy Creek, in decline, the mill having been closed by campaigns from greenies, the football club buildings to be demolished because of asbestos, the football club itself near collapse. And, not only that, a number of migrants are arriving in the town with some of the diehards of Bodgy Creek dead set against them and the threat of their taking jobs.

At one stage, when some of the migrants have been persuaded that they could play football, some of the locals are interested in where they come from and what their stories are. The new star, Sayeed, a Syrian, mentions that he comes from Aleppo – and one of his friends on the field, consults his phone app, tells him that Aleppo does not come up on Trip Advisor. This is one of the many good lines throughout the film that raise the social issues. And one of the bigoted townies proclaims that they ought learn English, and states that that’s all she aks.

Which means then that The Merger of the title is not just the merging of various football teams to make one which might succeed, but it is also The Australian current merger of asylum seekers and refugees finding a place in society.

In one sense, this film is preaching to the converted, those who want to welcome the newcomers to the land and help them find a place and a refuge. One is not too sure how those who share the opinions of the film’s diehards, those with a One Nationish type policies, would respond to the comic touches with which have political point.

The film is the work of Damien Callinan. It began as a theatre monologue with the actor speaking his lines. Now it has been amplified, taken outside, onto the football fields, throughout the town, homes and shops. While Damien Callinan does play the central role of the top greenie who led the campaign to close the mill, he also plays the former footballer who takes on the task of building up a new team and – we and they hope – to a premiership.

Central to the film is a young boy, a vigorous Rafferty Grierson, whose father has been killed in a motorbike accident. He is making his own documentary film, focusing on Damien with a touch of hero-worship and searching for a father-figure, along with his strong-minded mother, Kate Mulvaney. The dead father’s own father, literally nicknamed Bull, and played with force by John Howard, leads the reactionary group in the town.

We are introduced to quite a number of migrants, many with qualifications in their home country, trying to find jobs in the new country, trying to settle in, make friends – not always easy.

They are persuaded to play football and, gradually, they all combine with the locals to form a team – as well as contribute to business development in the town.

People mention such Australian comedies as The Castle and The Dish in connection with The Merger. In the same vein, the touch of spoof and satire, some engaging dialogue with Australian accent and tones, and an appeal, in football and political terms, for fair play.

1. An Australian comedy? In content, in style? The tradition of classic Australian comedies?

2. Elements of spoof, elements of satire? The message? 21st-century Australia, migrants, green issues, employment? The impact on those who agree with the sentiments? Any effect on those opposed?

3. Drawing on contemporary issues, of change, liking for change or not, small country towns and their decline, the closing of mills, the activities of Greens, issues of asbestos, issues of country sport, local media, papers and radio, the presence of migrants? The policies of such parties and independent politicians, One Nation?

4. The town, outside Walker, New South Wales, small, no mill, boarded-up, homes and streets, shops, SportsCenter?, sports fields, local markets? The spirit of the town? The musical score?

5. Damien Callinan, the monologue, transferring the plate to film, his starring, opening it up?

6. Neal, the introduction with the video, his making the documentary, cheeky, his age, the death of his father? His interesting following, hero-worship, father-figure? His relationship with his mother and his devotion to her? With his grandfather and grandmother? School, sport, watching his film and editing it? This continuing throughout the film?

7. Troy, his reputation, greenie, called town killers, past football price, making wine, selling it? His father’s house? Something of a hermit? Meeting Angie, her appeal to him, the clash with Ball? The meeting, his insurance and grand plan, the vote, the rejection of Campbell, supporting Troy, the football team? His recruiting everyone, help from Snapper, the discussion with so you need, the range of migrants in the town from Asia, Africa, Holland?

8. The initial awkwardness, practice, the locals joining the migrants, Carpet Burn and his hostility? The Dutchman and his aunt?

9. Angie, her relationship with her father-in-law, mother-in-law? Interested in Troy, attracted, memories of her husband, bonding with Neil? The spirit of the town?

10. The range of migrants, their range of stories, the men and women, the children, the pathos, especially of the stories from Syria? Presence in the town, jobs, joining with snapper in inventions and marketing, removing nail polish…? The place in the club, spirit, playing, the song, the practice and the actual matches?

11. Bull, going to hospital, the reactionary stances, the small group, coming with the posters, objecting to the migrants taking work? The irony that the Syrians moved next door to him, his hosing and pushing over the garden gnomes? The lift for seed, helping him, the sad news for sayyid about his brother’s death, his wife and daughter waiting for so many years for pieces, their arrival? Bull and his letter of protest to the local Parliamentary member, not posting it, change of heart? Supporting the team, the matches? The comedy with his wife, her patience and exasperation with him – at her trying the different clothes and answers?

12. The role of the radio, the newspapers, the spirit of the town? Troy, his personal life, relationship with Angie? His not putting snapper in the team? Later apologising to him, confronting Carpet Burn?

13. The final match, everybody participating, snapper and his keep? Winning?

14. An Australian comedy, an Australian message?

YOU WERE NEVER REALLY HERE

UK/US, 2017, 89 minutes, Colour.
Joaquin Phoenix, Judith Roberts, Ekaterina Samsonov, Alessandro Nivola.
Directed by Lynne Ramsay.

If not really here, really where?

This is quite an enigmatic title. And, enigma pervades the whole film. The central character who dominates the film is enigmatic. The situations in which he operates a certainly enigmatic. The snatches of dialogue, sometimes mumbled, sometimes indistinct voices in the background are also enigmatic.

Intriguingly, there is quite a range of popular songs, snippets of songs throughout the film ranging from The Air I Breathe, I’ve Never Been to Me and If I knew you were coming, I’d have baked a cake!

One of the consequences of all these enigmas is that the audiences could be involved out of curiosity if not emotional involvement. In fact, as we observe the mysterious, often unexplained, activities of the characters, it is as if we become detached observers. And there are enigmatic flashbacks to compound the curiosity and/or the detachment.

The visual style is also enigmatic, a blend of realism with stylised photography, darkness and light, angles, editing.

The central character is played by a rather hefty, bearded and ponytailed, middle-aged, worse-for-wear, Joaquin Phoenix. His name is Joe. We quite don’t know what is happening to him at the beginning but we just accept him, glimpses of memories, glimpses of characters, a drug deal, his having a short fuse, his returning home, some banter with his mother, especially with the musical theme of Psycho.

It emerges that he is a hitman. He also searches for young girls. But, his contacts and interviews, his targets also remain fairly enigmatic. There is a young girl, several. A political theme enters with a campaign to re-elect the governor, Joe following him in his car to his mansion, discovering a brutal massacre.

Which raises the question for the audience as to that aspect of the title: where is “here�? Is it in a story of straightforward realism? With flashbacks? Is it in the memory of Joe? Is it in his mind and imagination? Is it in his conscience? Is he going through some kind of purgative experience – with a joltingly dramatic final scene at a diner with the young girl and a moment of violence which can shock the audience, but then is reversed. And the characters are no longer to be seen, no longer “here�. And, while we saw them on the screen, where were they really?

The film was written and directed by Scottish, Lynne Ramsay, who has made some short films but in a period of more than 20 years, this is her fourth feature film (the others being rat catcher, More than Colour, We Need to Talk about Kevin). She won the award for Best Screenplay at the 2018 Cannes Film Festival. Joaquin Phoenix won Best Actor.

1. The impact? The awards, screenplay and actor at Cannes?

2. The audience observing, detached perspective, how much involvement, interest, emotions?

3. The American city, Cincinnati, the streets, apartments, the skyline, cabs? The alleys, drug dealers, the restaurants, the mansion, the diner? The film creating its own world?

4. Realism, memories, imagination?

5. The range of music, I’ve never been to me, That I Breathe, Baker Kate?

6. The enigmatic nature of the film, characters, situations, dialogue, half heard voices, flashbacks?

7. The introduction to Joe, Joaquin Phoenix and his presence, hefty, age? Scruffy, clothes, take not be shirt, wait? The memories, on the bed, the plastic, the vision of the Fort? The meaning of the flashbacks? The drug dealer, hitting him, short fuse? Going home to his mother, the Psycho theme, putting it in bed? The later sequence of her death, shot through the pillow? The young girl, families, violence? His role as hit men? Searching for the girls? The phone calls, meetings, violence and the prevalence of blood, water, putting his mother in the river, stones in his pocket, his descent into the depths, his deciding to surface again? The glass of water? Rinsing his head? The sauna? The episode with his tooth, extracting, the focus on mouth? The girl, her presence? The family, politics, the governor and re-election, Joe following him, the mansion, the massacre? Who slipped the governor’s throat? Joe, his clothes, his reaction, shutting off? With the girl, the diner, the talk, shooting himself, in his imagination, he and the girl leaving? Who was really here/on not?

8. Hits, bosses, contacts, the hammer?

9. Sexual exploitation, politics?

10. The supporting characters, his contacts, his mother, the girls, the governor, the past and its influence?

11. An impressionistic portrait?

THREE IDENTICAL STRANGERS

US, 2018, 96 minutes, Colour.
Directed by Tim Wardle.

Clearly a title meant to intrigue – and it certainly does.

At first, this seems a very cheerful show, an interview with a middle-aged man telling the story of his going to college, everybody greeting him familiarly, his being puzzled, and then discovering that he resembled a young man who had been at the college the year before. He gets in contact and finds that they are identical in appearance and manner.

The two men were 19 at the time of their discovering each other, so all was very exciting, the media was fascinated, journalists were interviewing, articles in the papers and magazines – which then lead to another family looking at the photos and realising that the son in their house also resembled the two and that they all shared the same birthdate and had been adopted out by the same American Jewish adoption service.

So, the audience is carried along with all this cheerfulness, the young men bonding instantly with each other, enjoying the publicity, and all the TV shows, living the high life in New York.

The parents, however, were not pleased that they had not been informed that their adopted child had two siblings, that there were triplets. The mood of the film begins to change, becoming more emotionally demanding as well as puzzling.

Meanwhile, the three young men open up a restaurant, working together. Date, get married, the beginnings of their own families. The different parents also seem to get on pretty well with one another and the audience gets to know them and their backgrounds as well.

And then the mood begins to change further, working like an investigative story, probing the adoption agency and its methods, the secrecy, the choices of the particular families and their backgrounds, and some follow-up to see how the children developed within their families, a project, officers visiting and filming, asking questions, everything being filed.

There is a tragic aspect of the film which also jolt the emotions, issues of health, mental health, questions of heredity. And, there are appearances from a set of identical twins who had been adopted out and then discovered each other, who are also interviewed on television, fascinated by the similarities in their separate lives.

At the beginning, two of the triplets interviewed are in their 50s, looking back with some exhilaration, some regrets, some angers as they try to investigate what actually happened to them, the agency’s choice of their parents and differing family backgrounds, and each of them having an adopted sister two years older.

This documentary is well paced, draws its audience in with its various emotions and moods, some very human experiences but also raising a great number of scientific questions, even more ethical questions, and the ever-continuing debate about nature versus nurture.

1. The impact of the documentary? Information, emotional identification, surprises, turns in plot, investigation, themes for reflection?

2. The New York story, the 1960s and the succeeding decades, the consequences?

3. Editing and pace, moods, emotions, the musical score?

4. The introduction to Robert, talking head, talking about college, arriving, everybody affirming him, calling him a kitty? The decision to contact him? The phone call, the discovery? Talking heads friends and their contribution? The story, the strong bonding, the interviews by the journalist, the newspapers? David’s family, seeing the photos, making contact? The three?

5. The three and their immediate bonding, the strong resemblance? The media response, focusing on similarities, the TV interviews, their response, at age 19, living the high life in New York, clubs, Copacabana, 54?

6. The background of the families, the different social status for each of the families? Introduction to the parents, the homes, the upbringing? The meeting of the parents?

7. The parents not happy with the deception, confronting the board, the father returning and the drinking of champagne – as if the committee was off the hook? The irony of that each of the family had an adopted daughter two years older than the brother?

8. The girls and the interviews, the brothers and their fiancées, the weddings, running the restaurant together? Eddie and his liveliness, the daughter, happiness, the Frank talking by his wife? The dramatic news of Eddie suicide and the reactions? The brothers? And the later interview with Eddie’s father and his being a disciplinarian, regrets about his not communicating with his son as well is he might?

9. The women twins, on television, the similarities of their lives, issues of mental health?

10. The twist on the turn for information, the experiment, the initiator of the experiment, the different assistance and their interviews, information? The ceiling of the results till 2066? The aim of the project, the decisions about the children, separating them, giving them to different families, different social status? Observers watching, filming, taking notes, writing up the files? The parents not knowing?

11. The reaction of the men themselves, seeing themselves as lab rats, the fact that there was no report?

12. The issue of nature versus nurture – and the need for more scientific information? Heredity? Upbringing?

13. Bob and David, their continued investigations, interviews, David contacting authorities to get commissions? The offhand responses?

14. Eddie’s father, the interview, his grief? Judgements on himself? The audiences attitude towards him?

15. The background of the women, the mothers, step mothers, aunts and their observations?

16. Further information, but no opening of the files? Where will this lead?

17. The importance of science investigation? The importance of ethical questions?

I AM PAUL WALKER

US, 2018, 90 minutes, Colour.
Directed by Adrian Buitenhuis.

According to all the talking heads in this documentary about actor, Paul Walker, who died tragically in a car crash and a consequent inferno in 2013, Paul Walker was a nice guy. His family certainly agree. Friends definitely agree. And this is endorsed by co-stars in his films.

Paul Walker was born in 1968. As a child he had some roles in television commercials and television series. He had a younger sister, Ashley. And a little brother, Cody, to whom he was devoted, 15 years younger than he was. Both Ashley and Cody contribute their praise to this film. Both his mother and father speak highly of him.

Writer-director Adrian Buitenhuis has previously made I Am Heath Ledger, using a process of offering biography, home movie clips, selections from films, testimony of those who knew the subject. It serves as an effective formula for this kind of cinema portrait – and so it is here.

Paul Walker was an outgoing person, very friendly, and definitely a man of action. In fact, the film suggests that he would have preferred to be involved in these outgoing activities, surfing, driving, and in later years, contributing to shark tagging. Plenty of clips to back this up.

There is information that a lot of this activity is rather hereditary – military serving grandfather, a father who served in Vietnam.

But, what about the film career? He had the opportunity to be cast in some dramas in the late 90s, Pleasantville, a jock in Varsity Blues, The Skulls – directed by Rob Cohen who became friends with him and auditioned him for the first Fast and furious film. And probably that is what Paul Walker is best known for, the range of Fast and Furious features where he plays an undercover cop exposing rackets in illegal races. As the series went on – and he is not in all of them – the films became bigger, more spectacular, even a touch of the bloated! But, this was the kind of film that the fans wanted, demanded, received.

The film offers a lot of speculation, including interviews with the star himself, about whether he wanted to continue as a film star or wanted to move back into the blend of relaxation and sport and social action. His daughter was born when he was rather young, grew up with her mother in Hawaii. At 15, she opted to live with her father and he was devoted to her.

This biography is for a niche audience, those who are interested in the life of film stars, their background and their career. Paul Walker was a star more than an actor and so his biography is that of a phenomenon, a celebrity, rather than a study.

(For those who are interested in the psychology of Carl Jung and his Personality Types, especially as applied in the work of Katherine Briggs and Isabel Myers, The Myers Brings Type Indicator, from this film, it would emerge that Paul Walker would identify with ESTP, this documentary providing a case study.)

GUN SHY

UK, 2017, 86 minutes, Colour.
Antonio Banderas, Olga Kurylenko, Ben Cura, Mark Valley, Aisling Loftis, Martin Dingle Wall, David Mitchell.
Directed by Simon West.

There are a number of blogging fans for this film, finding it amusing and funny. On the other hand, critics were not enthusiastic at all. The reviewer from Variety called it “a witless, graceless farce�.

This review is inclined to the latter.

Some people asked what possessed Antonio Banderas to take on this role. More than justified question. Here he plays an ageing rock star, a bassist in a band which got rid of him. He pretends to be British and not to understand Spanish though his character was born in Chile, where much of this film was filmed. He does nothing, drinks, bemoans his past. He has long locks which look rather unconvincing and dresses in garish robes in bright colours. He has married a former model, played by Olga Kurylenko, who, somewhat inexplicably, seems devoted to him.

They go to Chile for a holiday, winter, an abandoned hotel. She cannot persuade him to go for a tour of the mountains to see the llamas. Off she goes, finds that some of the group want to hunt and shoot the llamas and she causes some uproar. In the meantime, a group of rebels in the mountains (from respectable professions) abduct up the group. They are fans of the musician’s music and know the lyrics, delighting to find they have captured the wife and can ask a big ransom. She tries to escape but has to go along with them until she is rescued.

The singer phones his agent in London, an enjoyable cameo by David Mitchell, who sends his assistant to Chile to deal with the matter. She also has an Australian mercenary, an unpleasant character. In the meantime, the singer tries to get involved himself in rescuing his wife. Also in the meantime, an ambitious member of the American Embassy in Santiago bullies one of the local secretaries, wants to suggest that this is a terrorist abduction and to be treated as such with him going into action to the rescue.

What follows is a whole lot of shenanigans and complications. The direction is by Simon West who made such action films as Con Air, Lara Croft Tomb Raider, The General’s Daughter as well as features with Jason Statham, The Mechanic, Wild Card.

THE TRAP

US, 1946, 68 minutes, Black-and-white.
Sidney Toler, Mantan Moreland, Victor Sen Yung.
Directed by Howard Bretherton.

A touch of sadness. This is the last Charlie Chan film with Sidney Toler in the role. He had succeeded Warner Oland in the late 1930s and made a great number of Charlie Chan mysteries.

Mantan Moreland is here once again as Birmingham Brown, with his now politically incorrect comic rolling of eyes and nervousness which proved amusing at the time. He is very energetic. Moreland was to continue as Birmingham Brown in the four Charlie Chan film starring Roland Winters. Victor Sen Yung reappears as third son, Jimmy.

The director this time is Howard Bretherton, a prolific director from the 1920s to the late 1940s, many films are year, and many, many westerns.

The look of the film is different from the previous episodes, particularly with the end of the war, some outdoor photography, contemporary cars, a car chase. The lighting is much brighter. However, there are some studio sets, inside a beach hotel resort.

The focus of the film is on a group of theatrical people, actresses, wardrobe managers, doctor, impresario, press agent. When one of the girls is murdered, Charlie Chan is accidentally called in by Chinese girl phoning for Jimmy to come to solve the case. Then another murder. There is a variety of suspects, mysterious goings-on, Birmingham Brown being afraid, Jimmy flirting with the Chinese girl, Charlie Chan taking his time to assess all the clues – and, once again, a solution that the audience might not have been anticipating.

An average episode, but a farewell to Sidney Toler who died, aged 72, in February 1947.