THE CHILD IN TIME

UK, 2017, 82 minutes, Colour.
Benedict Cumberbatch, Kelly Macdonald, Stephen Campbell Moore, Saskia Reeves, Andrea Hall, Jim Creighton, John Hopkins, Elliot Levey.
Directed by Julian Farina.

The Child in Time is a brief television film from a novel by Ian Mc Ewan, author of The Comfort of Strangers, Enduring Love, Atonement, On Chessil Beach.

On one level, there is a realistic film about a couple whose child is abducted from a supermarket, who suffer from grief and guilt but separate, he an author who has a friend of a publisher who has political connections with the Prime Minister of England but who wants to give up his job and return to a quiet life in the country.

The parents are played by Benedict Cumberbatch and Kelly Macdonald, both very effective. The publisher who has to demonstrate eccentric qualities is played by Stephen Campbell Moore with Saskia Reeves as his long-suffering wife.

On another level, as the title indicates, the film moves in different time zones. The main one concerns the father of the child, his going to meet his wife at a seaside hotel and looking in and seeing a familiar woman. Later, in talking with his mother, he discovers that she had been there when she was pregnant with him.

The political connection is somewhat mysterious and the behaviour of the publisher, wanting to live a childhood that he never had, leads to tragic consequences.

Ian Mc Ewan imbues his story with a number of enigmas, intriguing for the sympathetic audience, perhaps offputting for those who do not become engaged with the story and characters.

1. Human drama, suffering, grief? Enigmas?

2. The work of Ian Mc Ewan, his novels, film adaptations?

3. The structure of the film: the shifts in time, going beyond time to mysteries of time and time shifts, the story of the child, disappearance, the effect on the parents, the visit to the hotel, Stephen’s mother, looking out, looking in, her being pregnant? The effect on Stephen? The story of Charles and Julie, publishing, the political connections, the role of the Prime Minister and his ministers? The story of Charlie, in the country, his regression, being the child? The musical score?

4. The facts of the child, Stephen in the supermarket with her, playing, her disappearance? The search in the supermarket, the later search, the notices, the authorities, the parents doing their best?

5. Stephen as a writer, in himself, his relationship with Julie, building up a family, the effect of his daughter’s disappearance, his continuing to work, their separation, his visiting her in the countryside, her coming to London, the continued love, having to adjust?

6. Julie, the disappearance, the effect, blaming Stephen or not? The need for the separation, the time? In the country, her cottage, his visit, the sexual encounter, going to London, the meetings?

7. Stephen, the meal with Charles and Julie, publication? The political connections? Charlie and his wanting to retire, to go to the country, Stephen not understanding it?

8. The parliamentarians, the Prime Minister, wondering about Charlie, summoning Stephen, wanting him to spy on Charlie? Stephen going to the country, the visit, his ultimate at Charlie’s behaviour, Charlie as a child, making up for what he lost in the past, his memories of deprivation? His wife, trying to help, patience, not understanding? The effect of Stephen’s visit?

9. The Parliamentary connections – and the touch of the sinister?

10. Stephen, the visit to the countryside, searching for Charlie, finding him dead? Charlie wanting to be a child in time – enjoying the play, but the fatal ending?

11. Stephen and his visit to his parents, the discussions with his mother, their sympathy, the story of the hotel, her pregnancy, the visualising of his looking in and a young
woman looking out? The mystical touches?

12. The overall effect of the variety of themes and the interconnections?

WOODY ALLEN

US, 2011, 192 minutes (113 minutes for theatrical release), Colour.
Directed by Robert B. Weide.

For audiences who would like an interesting and an entertaining overview of the life and career of Woody Allen, this is an excellent contribution. It traces his career up to his success with Midnight in Paris.

Woody Allen agreed to be part of this project, willingly giving interviews, at some length, in great detail, revisiting the scenes of his childhood in Brooklyn. His sister and producer, Letty Aronson, also contributes a great number of interviews – and there are visits to the site of his home, his school, pictures of his parents.

We see Woody Allen as precocious in his writing, even while at school, selling jokes to radio programs, being taken on by celebrity comperes and his career quickly underway.

There are many interviews, very interesting talking heads who cover their relationship with Woody Allen, appearing in his films, his producers, television hosts…

The theatrical version has an hour less than the television version which means that a number of films have been edited out. However, there is enough on the films that are included to give a strong impression of Woody Allen and his talent.

On the personal level, there is discussion of his relationship with Louise Lasser, his first wife, his relationship, personal and professional, with Diane Keaton, his relationship with Mia Farrow – and some intimations of the accusations which emerged in the 1990s, the impact of his marriage to his younger wife, Soon-ye Previn, indications that the issues would rise again (ironically instigated by the articles written by his son, Ronan Farrow – who may or may not be his son).

Whatever his personal life, Woody Allen has been a most significant contributor to American cinema.

Recommended is the 1997 documentary, Barbara Kopple's Wild Man Blues.

1. Audience interest in Woody Allen, his comedy, his films, his writing, over the decades?

2. Woody Allen himself, New York, Brooklyn, his talent is a young boy, writing, the beginnings of his career at a young age, radio, television? His acting and performance? Music and instruments and playing? His relationships, the scandals? The story of his films after 2012?

3. The importance of Letty Aronson, his sister, younger, her being his producer? The interviews, the explanation of the family, the stories about his mother, his life, school?

4. His writing, the radio, the style of comedy, the jokes? There is television patrons, the interviews with Dick Cavett, the other television personalities? His writing What’s New Pussycat, his comments, disappointment at his loss of control? Keeping control ever after?

5. The story of Take the Money and Run, the famous sequences about the hold-up and the gub? Its success, the 1970s, performance, writing?

6. Diane Keaton, Sleepers, Love and Death, Annie Hall, Diane Keaton and her comments? The impact of the Oscars?

7. The shift to Interiors, the homage to Ingmar Bergman? The contrast with the success of Manhattan, the views of Mariel Hemingway? The transition to Starlight Memories, the criticisms, the issue of his being funny or not?

8. The talking heads, Jack Rollins as producer, Marshall Brickman as cowriter, the performance?

9. The 80s, his achievement in the range of films and comedies, Zelig, Broadway Danny Rose…?

10. The 1990s, the long time with Mia Farrow, her role in the films, abuse? The situation, her performing despite the hostility in Husbands and Wives?

11. This film as an opportunity to see Woody Allen in close-up? His participation in the film, his friends talking to camera, at ease, the review of his life and career?

12. Woody Allen and his achievement? His place in American comedy? In American cinema?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

TOTEM

 

US, 2017, 89 minutes, Colour.
Kerris Dorsey, James Tupper, Ahna O' Reilly, Lisa Mc Hugh, Braeden Lemasters, Lawrence Pressman.
Directed by Marcel Sarmiento.

 

Totem begins as a family story. The focus is on a young girl, teenager, Kellie, who excels at athletics, feted by her father and the audience learning that her mother is dead. The father tries to take an opportunity to tell the family that he is interested in a younger woman and that she should become part of the household. It is clear that Kellie is not in favour although she tries to give some good impressions. The younger daughter, Abby, very quickly adapts to the new stepmother. There is also a boyfriend involved who comes to visit Kellie.

 

There are some ambiguous comments about the mother and her death. And there are complications with the mother's necklace, the grandfather visiting, mysterious powers and the boyfriend investigating the nature of totems.

 

Then, the film become something of a horror film, Kellie not at all the person that we originally thought she was, the mother also not being the same as intimated – with the result of her ghostly presence, seemingly attacking the stepmother, but...

 

A brief family film with an interesting horror/ghost twist.

 

1. A family story becoming a horror story? The credibility of the transition?

 

2. An American story, an American family, the tragedy of the death of the wife and mother? The opening, the focus on Kellie, athletic achievement, the intensity? Her award, her father’s congratulations and support, the boyfriend?

 

3. The American town, the action taking place within the house, the various rooms and corridors? The grounds? The musical score?

 

4. The family together, the meals, chat, cooking? The story of the death of the mother, her absence? Grief?

 

5. The father, his age, experience, the death of his wife, their having had troubles? His meeting Robyn, her age and difference, wanting her to become part of the family? Try to persuade his daughters?

 

6. Kellie, 17, at school, her place in the house, her devotion to her father, care for her sister? Happy as the little sister, not remembering her mother?

 

7. Robin, pleasant, her coming to the home, her being careful, cooking, Kellie offering to cook for Abby, Abby liking Robin's food? The father and his joining in? Being careful with the discussions, the memories?

8. Todd, coming to the house, attraction towards Kellie, Abby upset, Todd coming out of her room and Kellie being grounded?

 

9. Abby and her talking to her imaginary friend, Robyn encouraging her, joining hands, hoping that the mother was somehow or other present?

 

10. The transition to the horror style, faces in the mirror, ghostly presence? The seeming threat?

 

11. The various reactions, the father-in-law and his visit? The garage sale, the necklace, its significance, the father-in-law and his reaction, Kellie wearing it?

 

12. The research on totems, Todd and his information, visiting Kellie? The powers?

 

13. The transition in the plot, Kellie being the villain, her wanting control, antagonism towards her mother, getting Abby to hide, the confrontation with Robyn, the chase, death in the bath? The confrontation with Todd, hitting him with the trophy? The reaction of her father, Abby revealing that she had to hide, the attack on the father, tying him up?

 

14. Kellie, her madness, wanting everything to be as it was, the Freudian dimensions to her attraction to her father? The significance of her mother's ring not present when she
died and Robyn finding the ring at the base of the trophy?

 

15. The mother and her presence, seemingly sinister, benign, bringing Robin to life?

 

16. Kellie, being destroyed? The aftermath, the caravan, the family together yet Abby still talking to her imaginary friend?

 

__

 

 

 

 

 

PASSENGERS


US, 2008, 93 minutes, Colour.
Anne Hathaway, Patrick Wilson, Andre Braugher, Dianne Wiest, David Morse, William B.Davis, Ryan Robbins, Clea Du Val, Don Thompson, Andrew Wheeler
Directed by Rodrigo Garcia.

Passengers is a film about a plane crash. Audiences interested in this genre may remember Peter Weir’s Fearless and the aftermath of the crash on passengers and on those who have lost loved ones.

Anne Hathaway appears as a grief counsellor, holding group sessions, dealing with individuals, being supervised, suspicious of an executive from the air company. Patrick Wilson appears as a man who has survived the crash and interacts with the counsellor.

The film follows some of the expected lines of how a counsellor deals with people who have been traumatised, short portraits of some of the characters, in the group, outside the group and their challenge to the counsellor. Andre Braugher appears as the supervisor, David Morse as the executive from the company. There is a mysterious and neighbour, sympathetic, played by Dianne Wiest.

For those who would like to see the film without the revelation of the ending - stop reading here.

Commentators on the film remembered The Sixth Sense and the famous phrase “I see dead people…�. The issue here is who is dead and who is alive – or, is anyone live, and all contributing to the healing of the counsellor who has died in the crash?

1. Audience response to films about planes, plane crashes, the consequences, the survivors? Capacity for coping such trauma?

2. The title, a plain title, yet the twist at the end? Echoes of The Sixth Sense?

3. The visuals of the plane, the aftermath, people wandering in the ruins, the visiting of the crash site? The later inclusion of the flight, the passengers, Claire and Eric together? The years? Holding hands? The fall, the crash? The atmospheric score?

4. Eric, on the plane, on the ground, wandering, a pleasant man, yet enigmatic, his own life, his apartment? Meeting Claire? Companionship, ingratiating himself, his knowledge of details about her life, the effect on Claire, the bond, the sexual encounter? The sessions? His help, dealing with the others who entered into Claire’s life?

5. Claire, surviving the crash, the memories? Her relationship with Perry, the task, the supervision, the counselling? The psychological skills – or not? The encounter with Eric, interest in him, the attraction, the discussions, his knowledge of her, her response? The apartment, the sexual encounter? The consequences, telling Perry she had crossed the line?

6. Claire, counselling, her skills, the gathering the group, the interactions with them, the different personalities, going round the group? The encounters with Shannon, in the group, outside the group, bonding, yet the challenges of differences? The discussion with Norman? The bereft man and his seeming to want her? The other members of the group and the recurring in her life?

7. The neighbour, the kindliness, offering to help, the discussions? her reminding Claire of her grandmother?

8. The continued puzzles, Claire trying to deal with all the passengers, the effect on herself? The insertion of the crash sequence?

9. The significance of the insurance official, his continual presence, clear interviewing him, his devious answers, continually appearing? The irony for the reasons for his appearing?

10. The twist in the plot, the reversal of roles? Claire as dead? The other passengers and they’re all coming into her consciousness in order to save her?

CHARLIE CHAN IN EGYPT

US, 1935, 71 minutes, Black-and-white. All
Warner Öland, Pat Patterson, Thomas Beck, Rita Cansino (Rita Hayworth), Stepin Fetchet, Frank Conroy, Nigel de Brulier.
Directed by Luis King.

This is one of the lesser Charlie Chan films. Its archaeological setting in Egypt is very much studio-bound. It has the familiar story of archaeologists and excavations, the finding of mummies, sudden deaths and disappearances, a daughter upset at the disappearance of her archaeological investigating father, various business partners, an eccentric brother who plays the violin, a mysterious local…

The mysterious local is played by Rita Haworth early in her career. And the daughter, played by Pat Patterson, was the wife of Charles Boyer. There are other regular supporting actors including Frank Conroy as a suave villain and Nigel de Brulier as the eccentric brother.

The film also features black American comic, Stepiun Fetchit, who had appeared in a number of comedies and with Shirley Temple in Dimples. However, his bumbling manner of speech delivery, rolling eyes and seemingly kowtowing behaviour intended as comic is very much of the past and, with contemporary eyes, seems a kind of racist exploitation.

There are quite a number of suspects, Charlie Chan doing his usual investigations, interrogations, local authorities who have to bow to his superior skills, the villain being the expected professor interested in stealing treasure, murdering the archaeologist and concealing his body in a sarcophagus.


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.

CHARLIE CHAN IN SHANGHAI

US, 1935, 71 minutes, Black-and-white.
Warner Oland, Irene Hervey, Jon Hall, Russell Hicks, Keye Luke, Halliwell Hobbs.
Directed by James Tinling.

This is one of the better Charlie Chan films with some exotic settings in Shanghai, a popular venue for travellers in the 1930s and the setting for many films. It features Chan and his son, Lee, Lee at his most brash.

The plot involves opium smugglers and international dealers. Chan arrives to have secret talks with local authorities, he is warned to leave the city, is at a dinner where the principal authority is suddenly killed when a gift box opens and he is stabbed. There is an earnest young man played by Jon Hall, later action hero, and his fiancee, the daughter of the dead man. The various other officials, including Halliwell Hobbs as the chief of police in Hong Kong.

There are leads, mysterious drivers, thugs. There is also an American sent by the government as a secret agent to deal with the opium trade. He is played by Russell Hicks, who has a very dignified presence, who collaborates with Charlie Chan until he makes some mistakes, and it is revealed that he has murdered the real official and taken his place, something which the young man knew and was trying to prove but, present on the spot, escaping from custody with the help of his fiancee and her gun, it emerges that he was the hero and that the visiting American was the villain.

The popular ingredients of deaths, officials, romance, ambiguous behaviour – and dramatic resolution.

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.

ARMED RESPONSE

US, 2017, 93 minutes, Colour.
Wesley Snipes, Anne Heche, Dave Annable.
Directed by John Stockwell.

In many ways this is a routine action film as the title suggests. The film shows an intelligence complex, with IT far more developed than expected, method for extracting truth from prisoners. Then there is an alarm, chases and deaths.

The creator of the complex has suffered the death of his son in a road accident but is persuaded to come back because of the crisis. The creator is played by Dave Annable, the leader played by Wesley Snipes, the female lieutenant by Anne Heche.

There are scenes of torture and truth extraction and the introduction of the theme of war in Afghanistan.

The new troops arrive, investigate, discover the bodies, and then there is a flashback to a massacre in Afghanistan and the tone of the film changes completely, the troops being villains, the dead Afghanistanies ghosts wreaking revenge.

The film is directed by actor John Stockwell who moved into directing mainly with smaller budget action films.

1. The title? An action show? The horror story – and its twist?

2. Most of the action confined to the complex, the nickname of the Temple, top technology, the interiors, the IT control? The flashbacks to Afghanistan, the action, military, victims? The musical score?

3. The opening, the military in the Temple, relaxing, the alarm, the response, aspects of terror, unseen killers, the killing of all the military? The recurring images throughout the film? Increasingly more graphic?

4. Introduction to Gabriel, riding bikes with his son, the stone unsettling the boy’s bike, the boy going down the hill, the accident, his death? Gabriel withdrawing?

5. Isaak, getting in touch with Gabriel, persuading him to come back? Reluctance? The story? The gathering together of the team? Their working together? The variety, racial backgrounds? The role of Riley? The presence of a woman?

6. Going to the Temple, the search, the mysteries? Discovering the bodies inside and outside? Gabriel and his young assistant? The work on the IT? The parcels?

7. The early scenes of interrogation, the technology to get the truth, its being visualised on screen? The torture and confrontation? The man from Afghanistan, his reputation, his entering into the United States? His presence in the Temple? Being apprehended, his being put in the vat, the information forthcoming? The mystery of his presence, the plan, his role?

8. The flashbacks to Afghanistan, the revelation of the team and their brutality, the massacre?

9. The appearances of the ghosts, the role of the Afghan man and his link with the military? Audience response to the revelation about the military and their brutality?

10. The ghosts, the pursuit? Isaak and his leadership, the twist in seeing him as a leader in Afghanistan? The other members? The role of Riley?

11. The mysterious behaviour, the death of Paul? Riley and the confrontation with the Afghan?

12. The buildup to the deaths, the vengeance of the ghosts?

13. Gabriel and his role, his being wounded? Riley and the clashes, her being on the side of good?

14. Destruction, vengeance? Armed response, ghost story, twists?

THE WIFE

US, 2017, 100 minutes, Colour.
Glenn Close, Jonathan Pryce, Christian Slater, Max Irons, Elizabeth Mc Govern, Annie Starke, Harry Lloyd.
Directed by Bjorn Runge.

A film to be recommended for those who enjoy a solid drama with intelligent performances and themes.

The title is rather blunt. And, immediately it evokes different perspectives on the role of a wife. Are we looking at tradition, the wife as the mate to her husband, subservient to him, managing the house and household, a woman who is not to have a career beyond the home? Or, is the title ironic, critical of the tradition and urging women to move beyond the tradition? These questions have been relevant her many years but, in the context of recent years about sexual abuse and exploitation of women, the story seems more than relevant. It is challenging.

The action of the film takes place mainly in 1992. The married couple, the centre of the film, Joe and Joan Castleman, have been married for 35 years. They have two children. Joan has been supportive of her husband all these decades, especially with his reputation as one of the greatest living authors and now being informed that he is to receive the Nobel Prize for literature. There is great excitement, exhilaration at the news.

While Jonathan Pryce is excellent in the role of Joe, the exuberant narcissistic novelist, this is Glenn Close’s film. It is certainly one of her best performances, a strong screen presence, her mature appearance, a strength of character, and, of course, the probing of the reality of her life in the light of her husband’s work and the possibilities that she had, but…

There are some flashbacks to the meeting of the couple (played by Harry Lord and Glenn close’s actual daughter, Annie Starke) when she was her husband’s student and had written an excellent short story, her baby sitting for him and his wife, and her love for him. This is in 1958. There are also some flashbacks to 1962 and 1968 and glimpses of their lives together and, especially, chose success in growing reputation. There is a telling scene where a successful author (Elizabeth Mc Govern) advises Joan to give up any thought of a career in writing, little hope in a man’s world.

The main action takes place in 1992, some drama on the plane to Stockholm, but principally the two days in the Swedish capital. Joe has no difficulty in being in the limelight. Joan prefers the shadows, not wanting him even to thank her during speeches, very embarrassed when he does. But, we might have guessed, Joe has a roving eye, even to the young woman appointed as guide. (And, in some irony, the Nobel committee are happy to have someone assigned to help Joan: for shopping and for beauty parlours!).

There is a subplot about the couple’s children. The daughter is happily married, pregnant and gives birth to the joy of the grandparents. The son is an aspiring writer (Max irons), supported by his mother, hurt by his father and his seeming neglect, and something of a dampener on the celebration. But the complication is a journalist who wants to write Joe’s biography and is shunned by Joe. He is Nathaniel, played by Christian Slater. Of course, his questions and interest raise curiosity in the audience, and the last part of the film answers the curiosity.

In the aftermath of the acceptance speech and dinner, complications arise for both Joe and Joan – which, of course, it is over to the audience to see and appreciate.

1. A plain title? The positive meanings, wife and support, equal partner? Love? The negative aspects, the supportive and more menial role?

2. The opening in Connecticut, the American background in homes? The contrast with Stockholm, the landmarks, the city in winter? The hotels? The Nobel ceremony halls? The musical score?

3. The time shifts? The culmination in 1992? Going back to 1958 and the experiences, 1962, 1968? The cumulative effect? On the picture of Joan? On the picture of Joe?

4. The female perspectives on the film, characters, expectations, wives and their place, possibilities for development, the barriers? Creative women, women ignored, women downplayed? The realities?

5. The introduction, the couple in bed, the suggestions of the relationship, Joe dominant, Joan compliant? As a couple? The sex talk? The phone call, the news, happiness, leaping on the bed (as they did in the flashback)? The Swedish information, the accolades?

6. Married for 35 years, the ups and downs of their marriage, the pregnancies, David, his sister and her pregnancy? David and his story, his mother supporting him, his father seeming not to support him, David hurt and resentful? The group photo of the family for the media?

7. On the plane, the bond between the two, the later comments of the flight attendant? Nathaniel on the plane, his wanting to talk, Joan’s reaction? Joe’s negative reaction?

8. Audience impressions of Joan, Glenn Close’s presence, performance, appearance? Strong, controlling? The importance of love? Her being in the shadow, Joe and his bluster? The response to Joe’s career, creativity, reputation? Response to Joe, his reactions, his narcissism? Her response to support David?

9. In Stockholm, meeting the authorities, their being feted, range of people, photographs, speeches, the guides, Joe and the rehearsals and his collapse, the support for Joan – and her reaction to being told it was for shopping and for beauty parlours? Joan being retiring, not wanting thanks, retreating? Her keeping her eye on Joe? The revelation of his affairs, her forgiveness?

10. Joe, boisterous personality, attention, the rehearsal, his reactions, the bowing, his fainting? Joan and her going out? Her being pursued by Nathanial, persuaded to go for the drink, the later denial, later admitting the truth?

11. Joe, his guide, flirtatious, the kiss? Joe and his breakfast, absent from his room? The gift of the walnut and the memories of walnuts in the past, the messages on the walnuts? Joan flinging them at him?

12. The effect of the flashbacks, Joan as a student, young, her story, her baby sitting, Joe’s wife, the squabbles in front of Joan, throwing the tie? Joan going to his office, the attraction, in love, telling the child that she intended to marry Joe?

13. The social, the author, advising Joan not to pursue writing, that you would have to remain anonymous? The scenes with Joe and Joan and the writing, the editing?

14. The moods in Stockholm, the change with the phone call, the birth of the grandchild, the excitement?

15. Joe and Joan over the decades, from 1958, home together, the progress of the novels, Joan and her work, the success? 1968 and the growing reputation?

16. David, in Stockholm, surliness, reaction to his father, in the car, arguing with him, his father’s stern judgements, allegedly encouraging and disciplining him? The ceremony, the tie, his arriving late, the revelations?

17. The ceremony, Joe’s speech, the dinner, the lavish praise of Joan? Her leaving, the spill on her dress, Joe going after her? In the car, the argument, the responses, truths told, the flashbacks?

18. The revelation about Joan, editing the stories, her own story and praise of the story, the discussions with the author and her downplaying the role of women, urging her to be realistic? Yet her writing, eight hours a day, the effect on her children? The medal, her deserving it, throwing it out the window (the chauffeur later finding it again)?

19. The threat of Joan leaving Joe, the aftermath, the heart attack, his death and the fuss?

20. The drink with Nathaniel, his knowing the truth, her threatening him? On the plane, her composure, her secret? The flight attendant and the comment about the couple?

21. Joan and her future, David and his future?

22. A telling story about equality between men and women, lack of equality? Women and their subservience – and emerging more as their own person in the 21st-century?

MAVIS!

US, 2015, 80 minutes, Colour.
Mavis Staples, Yvonne Staples, Jeff Tweedy.
Directed by Jessica Edwards.

This is a documentary must for all those interested in popular American music, especially in the second half of the 20th century.

The Mavis of the title is Mavis Staples, the key member of the group, The Staples Singers, who emerged in the 1960s and continued through the succeeding decades, some highs and some lows, and with Mavis herself still singing and performing at the Newport Folk Festival in 2014, fifty years after her first appearance there, after winning a Grammy.

She is certainly a force on stage and off stage. Brought up in the South, she had strong support of mother who did not want to be in the limelight, and a father who was talented in music and singing and set up the group of the Singers, Mavis, two daughters and a son. One daughter went off to be married and left the group, the son spent some time in the Army. Yvonne, the other sister, performed in the backup with the others but was more interested in working behind the scenes and in management. By 2014, the two sisters are still working together.

The strong personality, besides Mavis, was the father, nicknamed Pops. The audience has the opportunity to see him in quite a number of performances, to be able to listen to his singing, to appreciate his musical talent, to see his influence on the career of the Singers, and his continued support until the end when he died at the age of 87 in 2000.

So, there is plenty to admire and enjoy in the presence, the conversations, the performance, the rehearsals of Mavis.

However, for those who love American music, it is an interesting quick portrait of a group who grew up with Gospel music, moving more to popular country styles and rhythms, becoming part of the development of songs in the 1960s, friendship with Bob Dylan and other notable figures of the period. The group also moved with the times, even at times moving to some of the rhythms of rock, moving away from explicit religious themes to social themes.

The influence of Martin Luther King was significant, Pops admiring him, supporting him, and the Singers appearing with him.

The Staple Singers may well be familiar to American audiences – but, perhaps, not so widely known beyond the US.

NORTHWEST STAMPEDE

US, 1948, 78 minutes, Colour.
Joan Leslie, James Craig, Jack Okoe, Chill Wills.
Directed by Albert S.Rogue L.

In the 1940s, there were many popular horse films from Green Grass of Wyoming, Smoky, My Friend Flicka. This is one of those films.

At beginning and end there is a tribute to Canadian authorities for allowing the location filming in Calgary and Alberta, the background of the Rockies. This is certainly an attractive aspect of the film.

The film has a very strong female character, perhaps a bit ahead of its times. Joan Leslie portrays Chris Johnson, the manager of a property, dealing with the workers, trying to expand the work of the property, especially with the horses. But, in the valleys and mountains outside there are a number of stallions, especially of white stallion who seems to lead the group. The owner of the property dies and his son, Dan, played by James Craig, has put it on the market.

He travels participating in rodeos, very successful and has been away from home for some years. He is accompanied by his friend who does commentary, comedian Jack Oakie. He decides to go back home, presuming that the manager is a man because of the name. On discovering what really happened and being accosted by Chris, he decides to conceal his name and goes to work on the property.

One of the main aspects of the story is the sparring between the man and the woman eventually, of course, meaning that they fall in love – but not after quite some defiance and Chris being able to rival Dan in a rodeo, make a bet, shrewdly buy more horses that ties him to the property.

On the other aspect, again course, is Dan’s attempt to corral the white stallion, chases, dangers, injuries… But, interestingly, it is Chris who is able to obtain the stallion – by making a mare available and his quiet submission!
For those who love seeing horses on screen – but an old-fashioned (except for the dominance of the woman) corny action and romance film.