LA PRIERE/ THE PRAYER

France, 2018, 107 minutes, Colour.
Anthony Bajon, Damien Chappelle, Alex Brendemuhl, Louise Grinberg, Hanna Schygulla, Antoine Amblard.
Directed by Cedric Kahn.

La Priere/ The Prayer is a film with Catholic themes more suited to the contemporary church in many places, the Catholic Church in a secular world.

Cedric Kahn, the director, stated that he is agnostic but he has some respect for the transcendent.

The plot concerns a young man, a drug addict, suicidal, who is taken to a rehabilitation centre in the mountains, a Catholic rehabilitation centre founded 30 years earlier by social-minded nun (played in the film by Hannna Schygulla). While there is a priest at the centre, it is a lay-run centre, modelled on contemplative monasteries with their ethos of work and prayer. It is former addicts who form the staff, exercise disciplinary authority, serve as the carers. (There is a neighbouring centre with the founding nun some distance away from the men’s centre.)

The image of the church that the film communicates is very much that of service and solidarity, and a justice response to problems in the modern world, the need for affirmation, care, and hope through rehabilitation.

The young men are seen doing a lot of work in the fields. They are also seen at prayer in the Chapel as well as at the Eucharistic celebration. There are traditional hymns, sacred music in the background. There are also enthusiastic popular gospel hymns, sung with great zest.

The filmmakers obviously believe in the power of reflective silence, some contemplation, finding one’s own capacity for prayer whether it be in the gospel tradition, in other traditions, in reflection.

As regards the priest, while he is seen at the celebration of the Eucharist, when there is a gathering of visitors in the summer and everyone sits down at outdoor tables, he quietly comes in, wearing his clerical collar but sits unobtrusively at one of the tables. The more significant scene where he appears is in the discussion with the young man who has had his ups and downs over the months at the centre, initially resentful and refusing to cooperate, touched by some of those who look after him, running away but encouraged to return by the daughter of a couple who run a farm nearby, settling down, actually learning all the Psalms by heart and able to recite them, becoming more devout.

When the group goes on a mountain hike and he is left behind, stranded on the mountain overnight, praying to survive, he believes that he should enter the seminary and serve God there. The discussion between him and the priest is very interesting and a vocation is counsellor would shout out from their seat in the cinema that he really should do a lot more preparation and thought). The priest goes through the young man’s reasons, testing them, commenting on his faith experience, on the repercussions of his being lost in the mountains but found again.

There is a great deal of respect for the church in its contribution to healing, on the power and beauty of prayer, of work, and of social justice service as well is its sense of solidarity throughout the film. When the film was screened in competition at the Berlin, the organisers programmed it for 9 am on the Sunday morning!

1. The title? Audience expectations? Prayer, to God, to transcendence? The Catholic background?

2. Locations, the Alps, the rehabilitation centre, the atmosphere of the countryside, the detail, the seasons? The mountains? The grandeur?

3. The musical score, the sacred music, the hymns, the evangelical songs? The different moods for prayer?

4. Liturgy, the reading of the Scriptures, the Eucharistic celebration, the Psalms, the Lord’s Prayer, the Hail Mary, the Creed at the procession? The rosary?

5. Catholic charity and service? 21st-century drug addicts and rehabilitation? Offering discipline, solidarity? The men together, the women together? The caregivers and their
pasts? The nun founding the centre? The priest in the background?

6. The director and his declaring he was a non-prayer? Yet the interest in the transcendent? And transcending drug addiction?

7. Thomas, his journey, bowed down in the car, the arrival, taciturn, the institution and the surroundings, his possessions, stripping off his clothes, the institution clothes? The rules? The background of his addiction, causing him to be a rebel, the instruments of change, the experience of love, the challenge by the nun and her slapping him, Sybille driving him back, his later gratitude? His becoming calmer? The months passing? Inviting her to the party, her having to work as a waitress? Xavier’s death, Thomas running, running to Sybille, the sexual encounter and its impact? Her aims and going to Spain?

8. The details of the camaraderie amongst the young men? Prayer, song?

9. The summer party, the range of visitors, the people giving the testimonies, the young woman and drugs and her becoming a stripper? The young woman returning after being a derelict? Ben, his relationship with his father, paying everything?

10. The Sister, the foundress of the institution, the 30 years, hearing the testimonies, her smile, calling Thomas, listening to him, saying he was lying, slapping him?

11. The trip to the mountain, everyone together, Thomas finding it hard, coming down, the last, lost, his fall, injury to his leg, the night, isolated, surviving? Coming down?

12. Thomas, his prayer, reading the Scripture at the Eucharist, knowing all the Psalms by heart? His spirit of prayer? Peace?

13. His thinking he had a vocation to priesthood, the experience of the mountain and the scenes of God? The detailed discussion with Father Luc, testing his motives, his hopes? Saying he could give up Sybille?

14. The farewell, the range of testimonies from the men, his thanks, going to the bus, waiting, changing his mind, the lift to Spain?

15. Sybille, in the garden, in Spain? The final shot of Thomas approaching her? Her turning?

16. The background of Catholicism, a more 21st-century Catholicism, social service, humanity and solidarity, the importance of prayer, discipline for rehabilitation, the nun and her role, Father Luc and celebrating the mass, unobtrusive at the party, discussions on vocation? Issues of belief, or not, going to church, not, but believing? The joke about the
advertisement for the nails and the crucifixion? The impact for a nonbelieving audience? Especially in Western culture?

LOVE, SIMON


US, 2018, 110 minutes, Colour.
Nick Robinson, Jennifer Garner, Josh Duhamel, Katherine Langford, Alexandra Shipp, Logan Miller, Keiynan Lonsdale, Jorge Lendeborg Jr, Talitha Eliana Bateman, Tony Hale.
Directed by Greg Belanti.


Simon is a 17-year-old high school student, popular, living at home with his devoted parents and his sister (who is determined to be a chef and does a lot of practising in the kitchen). It seems the picture of an ideal family, American style.

But, very soon, it emerges that Simon is deeply preoccupied, a problem about himself, a problem about his identity. He knows that his orientation is gay. However, it is a secret from everyone and he has not thought realistically about coming out.

Love, Simon is based on a book which has the evocative title, Simon vs the Homo Sapiens Agenda, by Becky Albertalli. It is well written, creates characters effectively, some very seriously, some with a touch of caricature. And it invites the audience to identify with Simon, as a person first of all, then with his dilemma about revelation or not and its consequences. While his father is genial, he is also prone to wisecracks and the audience anticipates that he may find Simon’s coming out difficult to cope with. Simon’s mother, however, is a psychologist.

At school, Simon has a very loyal group of friends whom he picks up in his car each morning. There is Leah (Katherine Langford), who is obviously devoted to him. There is Abby (Alexandra Shipp), new to the neighbourhood and to the school. And there are two black friends, Nick and Bram (Jorge Lendeborg Jr, Keiynan Lonsdale, who is an Australian actor), They have classes, do the ordinary things at school, several of them participating in the school production of Cabaret, the MC being played by an annoying school friend, Martin (Logan Miller).

The main comic element in the film, which lightens the seriousness times, is in the personality of the vice principal, Mr Worth (Tony Hale) who is forever in the corridors, commenting on everybody as they pass, especially as he confiscates their phones. He chatters, is friendly with the students – and has to be ready for whatever problems arise.

When word goes around the school that somebody is gay, the reactions are a mixture of acceptance, intolerance, mockery.

The device that the screenplay uses for Simon to act on his struggle is finding an email message from an unidentified student, Blue. Simon impulsively replies, using the code name Jacques. He does get a reply from Blue, then finds himself thoroughly preoccupied at school, in class, at home, at meals, talking with his friends, waiting for messages from Blue. Simon begins to pour out his heart, empathising with Blue, indicating his problems and, impulsively, realising it only after he has pressed “sent� that he has signed his message, Love, Simon.

Blue has his own personal struggles and the screenplay indicates three possible characters who might be Blue.

While the audience is drawn into Simon’s story, hopefully understanding or, if not understanding or, even, disapproving, the film explores the repercussions of coming out. What was difficult in past years is still difficult but the community has, generally, more empathetic response.

Because Simon seems so ordinary in his daily life, the coming out is a surprise for most people. And the film shows how they deal with it, especially because Simon gets entangled with his emotions then, with somebody tapping into his emails, there is always the risk of the unwelcome outing.

Whatever one’s approach to issues of sexual orientation, this is a film well worth seeing and discussing, a testing out one’s moral framework, of one’s emotional response, of empathy and understanding.

Love, Simon is an unexpected cinema invitation for thoughtful response to characters and issues.


1. The title? The focus on Simon? The introduction of the theme of love?

2. The 21st story of relationships, gender issues, sexual orientation, love and commitment?

3. Audience responses to the theme, American audiences, elsewhere? The status of discussion about sexual orientation? Civil unions? Issues of same-sex marriage?

4. The setting, the American town, ordinary, the home, Simon’s room, the kitchen, meals, the streets, lifting cars, school, classrooms and corridors, principal’s office, theatre and rehearsals, parties, Halloween and fancy dress? The musical score?

5. Nick Robinson as Simon, his age, his place in his family, his pleasing manner, studies, his relationship with his parents, his sister and her cooking, school, his plans, the group of friends and sharing with them, classes? Mr Worth, in the corridors, his comments, friendliness, confiscating all the phones? Simon as observably ordinary?

6. Audience response to gay themes? The reaction of the school, staff, students? The outing of the camp student, his manner, his hair? Mockery in the school, tolerance? Students not understanding fully?

7. The text, Simon in his room, reading the text, the decision to reply, the nature of his response, sympathy for Blue, the revelation about his own orientation? Visitations, sending the message? The consequent preoccupation and waiting for responses, distracted, going to the bathroom, with his friends, family meals?

8. The Cabaret production, Abby as Sally Bowles? Martin as the MC? The piano player, the teacher and her comments, the rehearsals?

9. Martin, and in-your-face character? In the library? Simon hurrying away, leaving his emails open? Martin reading them, approaching Simon, the blackmail so that he could getting better with Abby? Simon’s reaction?

10. The humorous parodies of the straight friends coming out to their parents?

11. Simon, supporting Martin, though reluctantly, the meetings, rehearsing the lines at the Waffle House, the various outings, and bemused by Martin? His presuming too much? Simon and Cavalier, Simon interpreting Leah in love with Nick, urging them to outings? The party, Halloween, Simon going is John Lennon, Leah as Yoko Ono? Martin and his Freudian slip? Bram, the friend, Simon finding him kissing in the room? Going home, Leah and her stayover, talking with Simon? Is not understanding her feelings?

12. Martin and the homecoming football match, as the Bear, interrupting the national anthem, the reactions, Mr Worth, the microphone, his declaration to Abbey, her embarrassment but her response? His humiliation? Revealing Simon’s orientation, exposing the emails? The effect on Simon, his sister talking with him, talking with his parents, his father’s awkwardness, his mother’s understanding? His declaration that he was the “same me�?

13. Students looking out at him at school, the vulgar mockery in the dining room? The teacher and her reaction, sending the offenders to the principal, Mr Worth and his getting an apology from the students? Isn’t present, the talking with Simon, the issue of coming out, living with being out? Issues of school policy intolerance?

14. Leah and Nick, their reaction to Simon, for his being cowardly, setting up the situations? And his having revealed the truth to Abbey?

15. At the Waffle House, the waiter, Simon’s attraction, the film imagining that he was Blue, the attraction, texting, the imagining the Jewish feast with the father?

16. The piano player, the film also imagining him, with his father? The holiday in the middle of nowhere?

17. The family support for Simon? His father weeping, the embrace? Blue and his responses self-revelation? Simon realising that he was in love? The texting, the stopping of the account? The pain for Simon?

18. The image of the ferris wheel, up and down? The friends paying for continuous rides? Martin coming – the joke and the apology? Bram finally arriving? His past friendship with Simon? On the ferris wheel? The kiss?

19. The topical issues, treatment, wide audience awareness of these orientation realities and relationships?

SPOILERS OF THE NORTH

US, 1947, 64 minutes, Black-and-white.
Paul Kelly, Adrian Booth, Evelyn Ankers, James Millican, Roy Barcroft, Louis Jean Heydt, Ted Hecht.
Directed by Richard Sale.

After World War II and into the 1950s, supporting features became somewhat more elaborate, more exotic settings, characters in conflict. This film has an Alaskan setting, focusing on salmon fishers, the role of Indians and their rights for fishing, exploitation by business people from the south. This is the kind of story that was told, in colour, in the 1950s with such films as Alaska Sees.

This is a film of two brothers. Paul Kelly plays the wheeler-dealer, Matt, getting a loan in Seattle and playing up to the attractive woman who organised the loan, Laura, Evelyn Ankers. He does a deal with importers to bring back large loads of salmon – which, he will fish illegally under cover of a deal with the Native Americans. When he returns to Alaska, he clashes with his brother who wants to leave and go south. One of the Indian girls has been his girlfriend and expects to marry him. To facilitate his plan, he invites the girl from Seattle to come north, insinuating that she is to be the bride of his brother, something she is not aware of.

There are scenes of fishing, processing, anning. To cover his tracks, Matt pretends to have been severely wounded and takes to his bed, needing Laura to look after him. In the meantime, undercover, he is using his own crew. However, they are discovered and a Native American is shot dead. The police begin to investigate.

Ultimately, the truth comes to the surface. The Native American girlfriend discovers the truth, goes on a trip with Matt and harpoons him when he goes into the water. In the meantime, Laura and Matt’s brother have been attracted to one another so there is some compensation at the end. And, as with the movie code, the crooked Matt dies at the end.

The film was directed by Richard sale, his first feature film, make a number of films for the next 10 years, often light comedies, then moving to television.

THE MARK OF THE WHISTLER

US, 1944, 60 minutes, Black-and-white.
Richard Dix, Janis Carter, Porter Hall, Paul Guilfoyle, John Calvert, Matt Willis.
Directed by William Castle.

The Whistler was originally a radio program on CBS, from 1942 to 1955.

A series of eight films began in 1944, small supporting features at Columbia. Four of the films were directed by William Castle who, during the 1950s, directed small budget action adventures like Slaves of Babylon, Saracen Blade. From 1958 to 1968 he made a number of exploitative horror films with all kinds of gimmicks to scare audiences, House on Haunted Hill, I Saw What you Did. He also produced Rosemary’s Baby.

• The Whistler - 1944, directed by William Castle
• The Mark of the Whistler - 1944, directed by William Castle
• The Power of the Whistler – 1945, directed by Lew Landers
• Voice of the Whistler – 1945, directed by William Castle
• Mysterious Intruder – 1946, directed by William Castle
• The Secret of the Whistler – 1946, directed by George Sherman
• The Thirteenth Hour – 1947, directed by William Clemens
• The Return of the Whistler – 1948, directed by D. Ross Lederman

As with the radio program, the films are introduced by a shadowy figure walking across the screen, with his signature whistling, which sometimes recurs throughout the film is. He begins to speak, is a narrator of stories about crime, sometimes intervening with narration during the action of the films.

The star of seven of the eight of the films was Richard Dix who had begun his silent film career in 1917, was a popular star for the next 30 years, appearing in the 1931 Academy Award winning Cimarron.

The interesting point about Richard Dix’s presence is that he portrayed a different character in each film. Most of the characters are not entirely sympathetic, ambiguous in their moral attitudes, sometimes swinging between the law and working outside the law.

This is the second in the Columbia Studios series of The Whistler. As with the first film, and with two more, the film was directed by William Castle. It has the added benefit of a story by celebrated crime writer, Cornell Woolrich.

This time Richard Dix appears as a vagrant who becomes involved in a financial fraud. He sees an advertisement that money is available from a bank to claimants where the money has not been returned to its owners. Interestingly, one of the claimants the bank is searching for has the same name as the vagrant, Lee Nugent.

The early part of the film is taken up with Nugent tracking down the place where the original lived, getting the records of a fire in 1912, getting all the details of the family story straight, presenting them at the bank and, eventually, successfully passing himself off as the original Nugent.

Nugent gets the help of an easily bribed salesman, played by Porter Hall, LinkedIn? money to buy smarter clothes, who puts him up until he gains the money, and is quite avaricious, following Nugent around, getting his mail, always asking when the money was available.

Janis Carter, who was to appear in another Whistler film, is a journalist who senses a story, has photos of Nugent emerging from the bank with the money, letting everybody know this good news story.

The complication comes in some men whom the original Nugent has swindled and they are out to get the man perpetrating the fraud, thinking he is the real Nugent. This means he has to hide, to struggle, rely on the journalist for some help.

The other complication is that Nugent is helped by a limping man, Limpy, who turns up helping him a great deal, especially as he is pursued by the son of the original Nugent’s father’s business partner who had let him go to jail and is now wanting revenge.

As might be guessed, Limpy is the actual Nugent. There is a moralising ending reminding people of confidence in perpetrating fraud without realising there could be dire consequences.

MISSING GIRLS

US, 1936, 65 minutes, Black-and-white.
Roger Pryor, Muriel Evans, Sidney Blackmer, Noel Maddison, Anne Doran, George Cooper, Vera Lewis.
Directed by Phil Rosen.

Missing Girls is a routine second feature of the 1930s. It has quite a lot of ingredients in its just over our hour running time. It is of interest to those who like these films of the 1930s and 40s, especially for the career of Phil Rosen, director of so many of them, working in films from 1915 to 1949.

The film begins with the theme of missing girls from home, a young woman with a repressive father, others disappointed in boyfriends, all coming to an office to help the girls get a job and accommodation. It is run by a competent young woman whose father is a senator – which leads into politics, the introduction of reform bills, the highlighting of quite a number of gangsters. The young woman is engaged to an ambitious reporter who persuades his editor that he should do a feature on these missing girls.

There are a great number of complications. The journalist is taken to court refusing to reveal his sources and is sentenced to a month in prison, with a focus of some of the running time on life in the prison, the journalist and his managing, the various contacts. There is also an assassination, some gunmen coming into the Senator’s house and shooting him and abducting his daughter and the maid (the girl at the opening of the film with the repressive father).

There are scenes of other gangsters, plans and plots, especially with Sidney Blackmer as a rather suave gangster, under suspicion but with an alibi.

When the journalist gets out of jail, he starts pursuing leads, with help from the FBI, and finally tracks down, during an alleged rambling walk, to find the criminals. The abducted girls come to the window and he sees them as well, smooth talks his way out of difficulties with the criminals, especially because he had pawned his coat for his walk and was able to get the manager and the pawn ticket to verify the truth.

Which, of course, leads to a siege and a lengthy, with an enormous number of bullets, shootout, some of the criminals escaping by the back door and being killed, the other surrendering, and the girls being released. But, there is a very interesting character in the tough Ma Burton, on the FBI wanted list, giving refuge to the criminals, getting the girls to do work for her and, planning to get some revenge on them, she is shot.

A lot of outlaws operating in the United States at this time – and this film reflecting the outlaws, the FBI, the work of politicians, the role of the media.

VOICE OF THE WHISTLER

US, 1945, 60 minutes, Black-and-white.
Richard Dix, Lynn Merrick, Rhys Williams, James Cardwell, Tom Kennedy.
Directed by William Castle.
The Whistler was originally a radio program on CBS, from 1942 to 1955.

A series of eight films began in 1944, small supporting features at Columbia. Four of the films were directed by William Castle who, during the 1950s, directed small budget action adventures like Slaves of Babylon, Saracen Blade. From 1958 to 1968 he made a number of exploitative horror films with all kinds of gimmicks to scare audiences, House on Haunted Hill, I Saw What you Did. He also produced Rosemary’s Baby.

• The Whistler - 1944, directed by William Castle
• The Mark of the Whistler - 1944, directed by William Castle
• The Power of the Whistler – 1945, directed by Lew Landers
• Voice of the Whistler – 1945, directed by William Castle
• Mysterious Intruder – 1946, directed by William Castle
• The Secret of the Whistler – 1946, directed by George Sherman
• The Thirteenth Hour – 1947, directed by William Clemens
• The Return of the Whistler – 1948, directed by D. Ross Lederman

As with the radio program, the films are introduced by a shadowy figure walking across the screen, with his signature whistling, which sometimes recurs throughout the film is. He begins to speak, is a narrator of stories about crime, sometimes intervening with narration during the action of the films.

The star of seven of the eight of the films was Richard Dix who had begun his silent film career in 1917, was a popular star for the next 30 years, appearing in the 1931 Academy Award winning Cimarron.

The interesting point about Richard Dix’s presence is that he portrayed a different character in each film. Most of the characters are not entirely sympathetic, ambiguous in their moral attitudes, sometimes swinging between the law and working outside the law.

This is the fourth in the series of Columbia Studios Whistler series. It was directed by William Castle, who directed another three of the films.

This one is more intriguing than most. Once again, Richard Dix portrays an ambiguous character on both sides of the law. He is John Sinclair, a millionaire by 1938 – with the opening of the film tracing back his service in the war, his business acumen, his building up an empire, but with a growing moodiness and dissatisfaction. He is recommended to take a vocation, a cruise on the Great Lakes.

He travels by train, meets a very friendly Welshman driving the cab, Ernie Sparrow, a former British boxing champion, a sympathetic performance from Rhys Williams, but collapses and is taken to a clinic where he also meets a sympathetic nurse, Joan, played by Lynn Merrick. She has been engaged for some years to a medical student, Fred. Sinclair falsifies his name to John Carter and agrees to stay with Ernie.

Ernie is a very genial character, kindly to everyone he meets. He makes such a good impression on Sinclair that he decides to go for the cruise, offering to take Ernie as a companion and inviting Joan.

The film opens with Joan, alone on an island in the lighthouse so we know there is going to be something sinister. She has become impatient with the long engagement to Fred though she loves him. She is also dissatisfied with her job and wants finance for a comfortable life. John proposes that she marry him just as a contract, the remaining six months of his life.

The consequences are different from what was expected. She becomes bored and lonely. He falls in love with her. Then Fred arrives, wanting to take Joan away. There are emotional clashes – with Ernie as a peacemaking go-between.

There is a further twist with John explaining to Fred how a perfect murder could be achieved at the lighthouse. Friend decides to follow through and urges Ernie to get locks for all the windows. However, this is John’s plan to murder Ernie, spikes Fred’s drink, trigger Fred into thinking that he was murdering John in bed, but it was only bedding. John then kills Fred and plans to throw his body out the window onto the cliffs below – but finds that the windows have all been nailed up by Ernie.

John carries the body down to the sea but is found out by both John and Ernie, concocting a story that neither believe. With John’s death, Joan remains lonely and isolated at the lighthouse.

Certainly one of the more unexpected screenplays in the series.

THE THIRTEENTH HOUR

US, 1947, 65 minutes, Black-and-white.
Richard Dix, Karen Morley, John Kellogg, Jim Bannon, Regis Toomey, Mark Dennis, Bernadine Hayes.
Directed by William Clemens.

The Whistler was originally a radio program on CBS, from 1942 to 1955.

A series of eight films began in 1944, small supporting features at Columbia. Four of the films were directed by William Castle who, during the 1950s, directed small budget action adventures like Slaves of Babylon, Saracen Blade. From 1958 to 1968 he made a number of exploitative horror films with all kinds of gimmicks to scare audiences, House on Haunted Hill, I Saw What you Did. He also produced Rosemary’s Baby.

• The Whistler - 1944, directed by William Castle
• The Mark of the Whistler - 1944, directed by William Castle
• The Power of the Whistler – 1945, directed by Lew Landers
• Voice of the Whistler – 1945, directed by William Castle
• Mysterious Intruder – 1946, directed by William Castle
• The Secret of the Whistler – 1946, directed by George Sherman
• The Thirteenth Hour – 1947, directed by William Clemens
• The Return of the Whistler – 1948, directed by D. Ross Lederman

As with the radio program, the films are introduced by a shadowy figure walking across the screen, with his signature whistling, which sometimes recurs throughout the film is. He begins to speak, is a narrator of stories about crime, sometimes intervening with narration during the action of the films.

The star of seven of the eight of the films was Richard Dix who had begun his silent film career in 1917, was a popular star for the next 30 years, appearing in the 1931 Academy Award winning Cimarron.

The interesting point about Richard Dix’s presence is that he portrayed a different character in each film. Most of the characters are not entirely sympathetic, ambiguous in their moral attitudes, sometimes swinging between the law and working outside the law.

This is the seventh in the Whistler series from Columbia Studios, 1944 to 1948. It is the last film in weeks which Richard Dix featured, in fact, his last film altogether. He had appeared in the previous six films, a different character in each, as is the case here.

This time he portrays the manager of a trucking firm, engaged to the waitress in the local diner, a firm friend with her son. They are played by Karen Morley and Mark Dennis. He comes under suspicion by the police for drinking and is disqualified from driving. With pressure from a necessary delivery, he runs the risk of driving, confronts a policeman who is killed – and his blamed for the murder.

He decides to move away but then is moved to come back to clear his name. He relies on his partner to collaborate with him to unmask the killers, having interviews with the head of a rival trucking company, a former policeman.

The assistant waitress at the diner is under suspicion, especially from Karen Morley’s alert son. They also discover a false finger which is filled with diamonds.

There are a number of killings and Dix relies on his partner – only to find that he is the criminal, the killer, in league with the assistant waitress. Under pressure, he agrees that the killer use the waitress’s car, go back to get the diamonds. However, the young lad is alert, gives the police the information. There is a shootout – and order is restored.

A lower key drama than some of the previous films. It was directed by William Clemens, who had directed a number of small features during the 1930s and 40s.

THE RETURN OF THE WHISTLER

All US, 1948, 60 minutes, Black-and-white.
Michael Duane, Lenore Aubert, Richard Lane, James Cardwell, Anne Shoemaker.
Directed by D. Ross Lederman.

A series of eight films began in 1944, small supporting features at Columbia. Four of the films were directed by William Castle who, during the 1950s, directed small budget action adventures like Slaves of Babylon, Saracen Blade. From 1958 to 1968 he made a number of exploitative horror films with all kinds of gimmicks to scare audiences, House on Haunted Hill, I Saw What you Did. He also produced Rosemary’s Baby.

• The Whistler - 1944, directed by William Castle
• The Mark of the Whistler - 1944, directed by William Castle
• The Power of the Whistler – 1945, directed by Lew Landers
• Voice of the Whistler – 1945, directed by William Castle
• Mysterious Intruder – 1946, directed by William Castle
• The Secret of the Whistler – 1946, directed by George Sherman
• The Thirteenth Hour – 1947, directed by William Clemens
• The Return of the Whistler – 1948, directed by D. Ross Lederman


As with the radio program, the films are introduced by a shadowy figure walking across the screen, with his signature whistling, which sometimes recurs throughout the film is. He begins to speak, is a narrator of stories about crime, sometimes intervening with narration during the action of the films.

The star of seven of the eight of the films was Richard Dix who had begun his silent film career in 1917, was a popular star for the next 30 years, appearing in the 1931 Academy Award winning Cimarron.

The interesting point about Richard Dix’s presence is that he portrayed a different character in each film. Most of the characters are not entirely sympathetic, ambiguous in their moral attitudes, sometimes swinging between the law and working outside the law.

This is the last of the Whistler films, a series that lasted from 1944 to 1948. Richard Dix retired after The 13th Hour and died in 1949. His replacement was Michael Duane, a much younger actor.

As with the other films, the Return has its twists. It focuses on a young married couple with the Whistler commenting on their future. They are in a small town, have fallen in love, go to the judge’s house to be married only to find that he has had to leave for another visit and cannot return until the next day. They pulled up in a hotel, after a hard bargain and bribe for the receptionist who does not approve of their not being married so the young man goes to the garage to get his car fixed.

The woman has disappeared. She is French, has married an American during the war but he he was killed in action. She has returned to the family of her husband.

A private detective befriends the young man and travels with him offering to find where the young woman is. It turns out that he is in the pay of the family – the in-laws of the dead soldier were planning to take over the whole estate and sell it and commit the young woman to a mental institution, stating that one of the cousins was her husband and that he had not died in the war.

The young man is determined to find out the truth. The private detective finds out that he has been deceived when he goes to visit the mansion and the caretaker explains the truth.

The climax takes place in the mental institution, the young man pretending to be ill but having access to the wards and rescuing the young woman. The family have left, confident that all is well but see the young man’s car. Just as there is a confrontation, an appeal to the doctor to intern both the young man and the woman, the private detective turns up with the police and explains the case.

Happy ending – and happy ending to quite a good small series.

SECRET OF THE WHISTLER

US, 1946, 65 minutes, Black-and-white.
Richard Dix, Leslie Brooks, Michael Duane, Mary Currier, Mona Barrie, Ray Walker, Claire Du Brey.
Directed by George Sherman.


A series of eight films began in 1944, small supporting features at Columbia. Four of the films were directed by William Castle who, during the 1950s, directed small budget action adventures like Slaves of Babylon, Saracen Blade. From 1958 to 1968 he made a number of exploitative horror films with all kinds of gimmicks to scare audiences, House on Haunted Hill, I Saw What you Did. He also produced Rosemary’s Baby.

• The Whistler - 1944, directed by William Castle
• The Mark of the Whistler - 1944, directed by William Castle
• The Power of the Whistler – 1945, directed by Lew Landers
• Voice of the Whistler – 1945, directed by William Castle
• Mysterious Intruder – 1946, directed by William Castle
• The Secret of the Whistler – 1946, directed by George Sherman
• The Thirteenth Hour – 1947, directed by William Clemens
• The Return of the Whistler – 1948, directed by D. Ross Lederman


As with the radio program, the films are introduced by a shadowy figure walking across the screen, with his signature whistling, which sometimes recurs throughout the film is. He begins to speak, is a narrator of stories about crime, sometimes intervening with narration during the action of the films.

The star of seven of the eight of the films was Richard Dix who had begun his silent film career in 1917, was a popular star for the next 30 years, appearing in the 1931 Academy Award winning Cimarron.

The interesting point about Richard Dix’s presence is that he portrayed a different character in each film. Most of the characters are not entirely sympathetic, ambiguous in their moral attitudes, sometimes swinging between the law and working outside the law.

This is a six film in the series. At the opening of the film, Richard Dix portrays an older, serious artist. He has a strong reputation and seems a genial person. His friendly with another artist (played by Michael Duane who appeared in the last of the Whistler films after Richard Dix retired and died years later). The friend also has a glamorous model, played by Leslie Brooks, who is intrigued by the artist and poses for him.

The complexity is that the artist has an ill wife, to whom he seems devoted. She is cared for by doctors and a loyal maid. However, the artist becomes more infatuated with the model who resists his attentions at first, enjoying his company, but then resisting the idea of marrying him what his wife is sick.

She, is looked after by the doctors and recovers. She goes to visit her husband in his studio, hiding to surprise him, then overhearing his talking to the model and promising to marry her and for her to wait because his wife will die soon.

The wife confronts her husband, threatens to cut off his supply because she has supported him all his career. He offers to move out, back and tries to put poison in her medication. She dies – and he marries the model. But, he is worried of the possibilities wife left a diary. The new wife finds it, discusses it with the loyal maid, with her artist friend – and, ultimately, the artist trying to strangle her is apprehended by the police.

A fairly evident moral tone.

TWARZ/ MUG

Poland, 2018, 91 minutes, Colour.
Mateusz Kosciukiewicz, Agnieszka Posdiadlik, Malgorzata, Gorol, Roman Gancarczyk.
Directed by Malgorzata Szumowska.

In English, Mug has several possible meanings. Apart from something we drink out of, mug is slang for somebody stupid. It is also slang for a person’s face – and that is the particularly relevant meaning here.

If anyone was wondering what contemporary Poland is like, the first 25 minutes of the film, with the quite extensive array of quick vignettes, in the city, travelling the countryside, country towns, homes, issues of migration, traditions of the church, all rapidly glimpsed giving an overall impression.

The centre of the film is something of the other mug, foolish man, in himself. The opening scene, is a very amusing exaggerated (we hope) parody of Boxing Day sales with the forces camped outside the shops, the doors opened, a passionate invasion, squabbles and fights to get the goods which, in this case, are underwear. Jacek (Matthieu’s Kosciukiewicz), get his packet, gets into the car to go back to his village in western Poland, speeds through the countryside.

Actually, Jacek has a lot of conversations with his extensive family about the possibilities of migrating to England, obviously a Brexit theme. There are divided opinions. And, it is Christmas, there is a lot of traditional devotion in the town so visits to mass, hymn singing…

Actually, Jacek works on a huge project, (an actual project in western Poland) where the citizens of the town collected enough money to build a statue of Jesus which was to rival Rio de Janeiro – and, in fact, is larger. So, the religious tradition is to the fore, visually, with the head of Jesus standing ready to be lifted up, the body, hands lying on the ground.

And what about mug in terms of face? Jacek has an accident on site, falling down a considerable height, with damage to his face. It is pointed out that he has the first face transplant in Europe. Lest the audience feel over sympathetic towards him, he seems to be a cheerful bloke and not as put out about the injuries to his face as we might expect (or we would have had).

But, it all has its consequences. He had proposed to his girlfriend and they had engagement photos taken. She is put off by his appearance. Jacek’s sister, however, is his main support, while his mother is hugely upset, thinks that he is another person altogether, feels that he is something of a devil – which later leads to the parish priest getting in and exorcist and a parody sequence of The Exorcist. Traditional devotion might still be prevalent in Poland but there are also bizarre superstitions.

We follow Jacek’s troubles, a strong critique with a scene where his application for disability benefits is harshly rejected, where he has problems getting jobs, where he does frighten some people although, the surgeons had done a fairly good job on his face.

In the meantime, the writers introduce some themes about parish priests. At first, the parish priest seems reasonable enough, celebrating Mass, making appeals for the statue, making appeals, in fact, for financial support of Jacek. But, it is where the confessional sequences start that there is something of parody and an audience will realise why a lot of people are put off going to confession. Jacek’s brother-in-law turns up first. He is rather loud mouthed, talking before he thinks… His confession is about sexual temptation (so many thinking that the word temptation has only sexual connotations rather than for sins of anger or exploitation). The priests response is reasonable enough though a touch too curious. Then the mother comes with all that story about her son being a devil, wanting to get the devil out with the subsequent parody of the film of The Exorcist with Jacek screeching only to burst out laughing! Then the fiancee, the ex-fiancee comes and talks about sexual matters with the priest going far too far in wanting explicit detail.

Eventually, the statue was erected and the Bishop and his secretary are called to bless the statue with the Bishop being made to look rather foolish when the statue is looking in the wrong direction and there will have to be subsequent work and he remarks that he is not against Muslims working there (and being corrected to indicate that it is Gypsies who are working there who are not Muslims). So, some direct as well to one tongue-in-cheek criticism of the church.

And what will Jacek do? Is there a place for him and his town? Or, will his solution be in fact to migrate?

1. The title? The face? The slaying? The tone?

2. The Polish film, Polish perspectives? The first 25 minutes and the vast range of vignettes about contemporary Polish life and characters? The so, the crowds, fighting, the countryside, hard life, the car speeding and the music, the fairy, the farms, the cattle, the family and the houses, issues of migrating to England, the jokes with the touch of racism, the celebration of Christmas, the building of the vast statue of Jesus, the engagement, the photographs? The Catholic traditions? Western Poland? The hymns, the musical score?

3. Jacek, his age, in himself, the sale, fighting, with the parcel, driving fast, the rock music, his place in the family, working on the farm, his attention to Dagmar, the proposal, the photos? His working on the site for the direction of the statue? His future?

4. The statue, the vast amount of work, the cosplay by the local community, the information at the end? The building, the plinth, the hands, the placing of the head, the argument about which direction it should be facing, the comparisons with Rio de Janeiro?

5. Jacek and is working, the fellow workers, the collaboration, his sudden fall? In hospital, the doctors and nurses and the discussions about his health? The treatment? The time? The significance of his face in the transplant? The first in Europe? Jacek getting up, looking in the mirror, his cheerful perspective?

6. His coping with his condition, the visuals of his appearance, the surgery, the face of this texture? The limitations of his movement, smiling or not? The media pursuit, questions, that she is from the people, the television interview with the family?

7. Jacek and his sister, her continued support? Going to the board, the disability petition, the harsh attitudes of the board, the discussion, no financial support, considering that he could work part-time? And the range of works available, and the “kiss my ass� situation?

8. The approach of the advertising company, the irony, bizarre? His agreeing, becoming a model, is being photographed, the promotion of the lotion?

9. The role of the Catholic Church, the celebration of Christmas, people attending Mass, their participation, singing of hymns? The priest, his role in the town, his prayers, the financial appeal for the statue added significance? The later taking up a collection for Jacek and his welfare? The later collection people not contributing?

10. The role of the confessional? The brother-in-law, talk about sex, talking about pornography, talking about the coldness of his wife, and having to be in bed with children? The reaction of the priest, the consideraions of sin? Jacek’s mother, her thinking the Jacek was not her son, that there was another son inside, her fears, harsh treatment of him? The priest raising the issue of exorcism in the presence of the devil? Dagmar are going to confession, the priest asking her to continue with prurient detail? The lack of credibility for people considering the sacrament of reconciliation at present?

11. The dedication of the statue, the presence of the Bishop, the priests, the discussion about the direction the face of Jesus should be? The work to continue, the Bishop thinking that the Gypsies were Muslims and being corrected?

12. The mother, her reaction to her son, the priest in the exorcist coming, the parody of exorcist sequences in films – the cries, the movement, the violence? And Jacek finally laughing and sending it up?

13. Dagmar, her avoiding Jacek, the visit to her mother and the mother ousting them? His bringing flowers? Waiting for her? Her date? Her imagining him like the old Jacek? Her confession?

14. Sympathetic grandfather, Jacek the embrace, his death, the funeral? The family fight at the funeral and the issues of the land and inheritance?

15. The effect on the family? Family traditions in Poland? The role of the church? Family divisions? Jacek finally getting on the bus and leaving?