A MOMENT IN THE REEDS

Finland, 2017, 108 minutes, Colour.
Janne Puustinen, Boodi Kabbani, Mika Melender
Directed by Mikko Makela.

This is a slow-burning film from Finland, a film presenting a gay perspective on relationships, paralleling films with heterosexual relationships, establishing characters, emotions, attraction, relationship itself, tensions…

The central character is a young man who has escaped Finland and the pressures from his father to study literature, Finnish poetry as well as Baudelaire, in Paris. He has almost finished when he returns for a few days to help his father renovate the family summerhouse before he sells it.

The father is of the old school, severe in his attitude towards his son, disapproving of his orientation, harsh on his artistic wife who left him and is now dead. Even on the day he arrives back home, the son has to help his father with the work of renovation – and that is certainly not his forte. The young man intends to return to Paris and to complete his studies and probably never to return to Finland.

However, his father has consulted an agency and has employed a worker who turns out to be a former architect from Syria, who does not speak Finnish, but is very good at his tasks.

For the first 45 minutes of the film, the screenplay builds up the relationship between father and son in their tensions, the arrival of the worker, the father’s initial hostility to a foreigner, a Muslim, especially when he doesn’t speak Finnish. However, he appreciates his work.

The audience can see that the screenplay wants to build up a rapport between the worker and the son and, after a period in the sauna, chatting, listening to music, the affair begins. There are several more explicit scenes throughout the film.

However, the emphasis is on the emotions of the two men, their love for each other, shared interests, companionship – and the growing hostility of the father.

The Syrian receives a phone call indicating that his family wants to come to Finland and he finds he does not want to begin again, but wants to make Finland his country while the young man clearly wants to leave it behind.

There are many lyrical moments, sunsets and clouds, the two men in a boat on the lake, the dramatisation of fondness and intimacy.

The only other character in the film occurs when the son drives into town to buy something and finds a woman who remembers him from the past as well as his father – but he discovers that the town has closed down.

This is a film which audiences with a gay orientation will appreciate – and is a well written and acted opportunity for other orientations to appreciate relationships, love.

CORPO ELETRICO/BODY ELECTRIC

Brazil, 2017, 87 minutes, Colour.
Kelner Macedo, Lucas Andrade, Welket Bungue, Ronaldo Serruya.
Directed by Marcelo Caetano.

In the original film, Fame, the lyrics of one of the songs began “I sing the body electric…�. Though, there is no reference to this in this film.

This is a film made for gay audiences in Brazil and throughout the world. It is a character portrait rather than a developing narrative, glimpses of a life and its background and, then, suddenly ending.

One of the strengths of the film is actually the background. The young man, Elias (Kelner Macedo) works in a garment factory in São Paolo. The film gives a great deal of attention to the factory and the workers, the women at their sewing machines, the designers in their rooms and offices, the cutting of the fabrics, the plans for sales. There are also bonds between many of the workers and they are shown going out on the town, making agreements about working overtime before Christmas, many of them celebrating the summer at the beach.

Elias is shown as a genial young man of 23, good at his work and enjoying it, later asked by his boss if he had plans for the future, to set up his own company – but the young man of 23 has not given much thought even to his life in five years. He definitely lives in the present.


Elias is very cheerful, has a great number of partners, not particularly worried about relationships, commitment or permanency although he has lived with an older man to whom he returns for visits, especially and his house at the beach for the summer vacation.

Elias is also very forthcoming in discussing his relationships and the sexual encounters, an example where he is followed from a diner by a security agent at the mall who wants him to keep the encounter secret. There is also another young man at the factory, Wellington, who any career guidance counsellor would immediately notice that he has a propensity for becoming a Drag Queen – which he ultimately will do. He is also character of great verve – and very camp. Elias and Wellington also have a group of Drag Queen friends for whom they make costumes, have sexual liaisons, sometimes in groups.

So, the film focuses on the character of Elia’s and his carefree attitudes and not thinking of the future, always friendly and supportive. This is particularly so for a man who arrives from Guinnea Bissou to work in Brazil and send money back to his family. Always in the background is the realistic life of the city, sunny, extrovert, full of life.

And while the film does have explicit sexual encounter sequences, with the introduction of the group of Drag Queens it becomes particularly camp.

There is no major climax to the film although many of the workers assemble at the wealthy man’s summerhouse, swimming, a lot of drinking… And a festive occasion when one of the workers at the factory brings his fiancee, not quite aware of the atmosphere of the house, but is welcomed and treated to a celebratory ritual.

Will Elias return to work the next day as he should? Will he just go into the water and float? And that is where the film ends.

DAMSEL

US, 2018, 113 minutes, Colour.
Robert Pattinson, Mia Wasikowska, David Zellner, Nathan Zellner, Robert Forster, Joseph Belingerie.
Directed by David Zellner, Nathan Zellner.

When we see the word “damsel� in the title of the film, the expectations are probably to find something of a “damsel in distress�. The damsel in this film does experience some distress – but she is one of the last women who needs to be rescued!.

This is a Western. But it is not the kind of Western we are accustomed to. There are beautiful location sequences, in the mountains, as well as a town by the sea. There are unusual characters, especially some old hands in the town, some men roving the wilds, people living in isolated huts.

We soon learn that the tone of this film will be different. In the vast deserts, with towering mesas, a lone man is sitting waiting for a stagecoach. He is a Parson, disillusioned with his work and his congregation and their lack of interest, wanting to go back home East. Another young man turns up, his wife having died in childbirth, wanting to go West and make new beginning. The former Parson sheds his clothes and gives them to the young man and wanders out into the desert. Where to from here? (Somebody remarked that this is in the vein of the Coen Brothers.)

At the opening, we see some joyful scenes, the two protagonists, Samuel and Penelope, dancing in a town celebration, an eager band, smiles on the faces of the two. Surely a romance in progress or coming up!

Well, not exactly.

The first half of the film focuses on Samuel, played by Robert Pattinson as an earnest young man in the West, and a gold tooth which makes him more striking, but wandering the West, eventually arriving at the town in a rowing boat with a big box containing a diminutive horse – a gift for Penelope. But, what Samuel is doing in the town, despite some derision from the old fellows, is looking for a Parson and take him back to his town to perform the marriage ceremony with Penelope. The Parson is dead drunk, sees himself as a failure – and is the young man we saw earlier who wanted to go West to make a new beginning.

The first half of the film then is the trek with Samuel and the Parson going back to find Penelope so that Samuel can get on his knees and propose to her. He feels she has been abducted by a rival and he is there to free her, give her a ring – and the horse.

As might be expected, it doesn’t all turn out as Samuel expected – nor as the audience expected. Penelope is no damsel in distress and Samuel has misunderstood the situation completely. And then there is a twist in the plot for audiences to discover.

The second part of the film focuses on Penelope, her response to Samuel and the consequences, her hold over the Parson, not trusting him, and their trek back to the town. It is a reverse proceeding, troubling for the Parson, encountering the wild man that Samuel and the Parson had confronted earlier in the film as well as a Native American offering an occasion for some reflection on rights and prejudice.

Where are they going? Do they know? How much does it matter? It is not spoiling the ending to indicate that the ending is quite open, leaving the audience to determine just what they think will happen to Penelope, or not. Penelope is played by Mia Wasakowska in a very vigorous performance.

The film was written and directed by brothers Nathan and David Zellner. They both appear in the film, one as the Parson encountered during the journey, the other the brother of the alleged abductor of Penelope.

Using the Western conventions – but tongue-in-cheek.

1. The title? Expectations? The reality of the title and its irony?

2. The American West, the weird west? The locations, the majestic canyons, the desert, waiting for the stagecoach? The town, the dancing? The town by the sea, the bar, the travels through the countryside, the scenery? The hut, the confrontation? The picture of the West? Musical score, the songs – especially Samuel’s song for Penelope?

3. The tone, the prologue, the former pastor, waiting for the stagecoach in the isolation of the mesas, wanting to go east, disillusioned by his mission, those unwilling to listen, his stripping, giving his clothes and Bible to the waiting traveller? The traveller, the death of his wife in childbirth, wanting to make a new beginning?

4. The second prologue, Samuel and Penelope, the joy and exhilaration of the dancing? The band?

5. Robert Pattinson as Samuel, his age, bearing, manner, arriving by sea, with a small horse in the box, going to the bar, the taunts of the men at the bar, whisky and his stomach? Seeking the parson? His drunkenness, sobering him up in the sea, payment, the offer of extra? Telling the story of Penelope, having the engagement ring, the promise to kneel and propose? The gift of the horse, Butterscotch, for her? Travelling with the parson, bonding? Camping out? Rufus, at the shore, the chase, his falling over the cliff, shots being fired? Telling the story of Anton, and the abduction of Penelope? Samuel coming to confront him and win her?

6. The parson, his role in the prologue, getting the parson’s clothes, his drinking, sobering up, being hired for the wedding, the telegram, the promise of money, a fearful man?

7. Arrival at the hut, the setup, the parson with the rifle, Samuel hiding behind the outhouse, the timing, the shooting from the house, Anton going to pee, his being shot? Samuel firing into him? Penelope and her anger, firing, the true story, Samuel and his delusions, the gift of the pony, the ring, his attempted proposal, her spurning him? Her anger, Samuel going into the outhouse and killing himself?

8. The parson, his fear, Penelope controlling him, packing the dynamite around him? Her control, the talk, her blowing up the hut? The parson and his possible escape, deciding not to? Penelope forcing him to dig the grave, his eulogy, reading from the Bible, Penelope and her prayer? Penelope sleeping on her husband’s grave? The intensity of her love?

9. The two and the traveling, the dangers, Penelope and her character, strong, hard?

10. The encounter with Rufus, his being thought dead, his bandaged head, the blood? Talking with Penelope, the anger about his brother’s death? Seeing the grave? Proposing? Penelope saying she was pregnant? The Indian firing the arrow, killing Rufus, his staggering, falling on the detonator and the explosion?

11. The Indian, 20th century language, conversation? Dress, manner, killing Rufus to save Penelope? The conversations with the parson? The parson talking about prejudices, never having met Native Americans, guessing his tribe, wanting to learn the ways, the language? The Indian turning him down? The parson getting nearer sleeping and the Indian with the axe? The irony of stealing the horses?

12. Penelope the parson, going to the town, parting ways, the parson’s proposal, her hitting him with the rock?

13. The story leaving them at the edge of the town – and what…?

THE HEIRESSES/ LAS HEREDERAS



Paraguay, 2018, 95 minutes, Colour.
Ana Brun, Margarita Irun, Ana Ivanova, Nilda Gonzalez, Maria Martins, Alicia Guerra.
Directed by Marcelo Martinessi.

It is not often that we see a film from Paraguay. This is a rather intense personal drama, focused on a woman in her 50s, aristocratic in her manner, having to face changes in her life when her longtime companion has been involved in fraud and many of the valuable possessions in the house have to be sold.

While we do not see many films from Paraguay, we do not see many films from Latin America with a lesbian theme. The relationship between Chela (Anna Brun) and Chiquita (Margarita Irun) is taken for granted, the background to the women’s lives, love and intimacy that they have shared for a long time.

However, Chiquita has to go to jail. Chela visits her there, finding the atmosphere of the jail rather distasteful. She is withdrawn, does some painting at home, looks through the door at various clients who come to examine cutlery, furniture that they intend to purchase. She has delegated the care for the clients to one of the maids.

Where is this portrait of Chela to go? One day a friend asks her to drive her to a meeting and then to do some other jobs with her car. An anxious woman accosts Chela asking her for a lift to get away from her violent companion. What emerges is an opening to the world for Chela, driving the mother of this woman to doctor’s appointments, becoming something of a taxi driver, even, though fearful, venturing onto a busy freeway. It is the first time that Chela has had to do any ordinary living and is rather exhilarated by the experience.

There is a testing of her sexual feelings when she continues to drive for the woman and is attracted towards her.

There is some delicacy in the portrait of the women, in the changes that Chela must face during her 50s and the consequences for her own life. Anna Brun, as Chela, won the Best Actress award at the 2018 Berlin Film Festival.

1. A film from Latin America, Latin American story, characters, situations?

2. The house and the interiors, the sale? The meetings for the women, parties? Prison? The taxi and the roads?

3. The women’s story, few men appearing in it? Women, relationships, love, lesbian themes?

4. Chela story, her age, depression, selling the house, relationship with Chiquita, her love for her, life with her and intimacy? Chiquita going to prison for fraud? Sales? The help of Carmela? The 50th birthday party, the songs? Chela and her painting, recluse, meal and service? Chela visiting the jail, the fearsome prisoners? Driving, her friends asking for lifts, the taxi service, payment and her experience of the work force, helping Angie, and his mother, going to the far town, learning to drive on the freeway? Experiencing freedom? The maid, the help in the house, with the clients? Sales? The meeting with Angie, going to the house, wanting intimacy, the effect? Chiquita coming home? The portrait of Chela?

5. Chiquita, her character, running the house, forceful, intimate, pushing Chela, the fraud situation, going to jail, getting out, returning home?

6. The maids, serving the house, providing information about the sales?

7. Carmela, friendship?

8. The clients, the explanation of the goods, cutlery, the glasses, the paintings, the table, whether the house was for sale?

9. Angie, her relationship with Cesar, clash with him, getting the ride with Chela, the idea of driving her mother for the operations? The growth of friendship, confiding stories, Angie and a new man? Chela waiting for Angie, buying the wine, going home, Angie searching the house, the promise of intimacy?

10. The effect on Chela, on the other women? The future?

THE BOOKSHOP

Spain, 2018, 113 minutes, Colour.
Emily Mortimer, Bill Nighy, Patricia Clarkson, Honor Kneafsey, James Lance, Hunter Tremayne, Frances Barber, Reg Wilson, Michael Fitzgerald, Nigel O' Neill, Harvey Bennett.
Directed by Isabel Coixet.

A title like The Bookshop seems a box office risk. With the closing of so many bookshops, with the reliance on Internet, social media, online books, the title seems, despite so many readers’ regrets, something of an anachronism.

However, Spanish writer-director, Isabel Coixet, is certainly an admirer of books. In 2007, she made a film with the evocative title, The Secret Life of Words.

While the director is Spanish, she has made quite a number of films in English, in the United States, in England. This one is very much in England, though the location photography for the British coast was done in Ireland.

The setting is 1959. Florence is a war widow, still grieving and unsettled but who now decides to fulfil an ambition to open a bookshop in a small town on the coast. She feels she is ready. She loves books. She has legal advice, she has financial advice. Could it go wrong?

The answer lies in a character of a local grande dame, exercising power in the town, seeing herself as the leader of the town. She is the wife of a retired general, Mrs Gamart. She is played, all stops out, as very British by American actress, Patricia Clarkson. While Florence had taken possession of an empty residence, The Old House, Mrs Gamart had intended the house to be used as a local arts centre.

The film shows Florence’s exhilaration in setting up the bookshop. She is helped in the store by a young local girl, Christine (Heather Kneafsey), quite outspoken, quite determined, but, as she says, not a reader, although she enjoys geography and maths. Another ally for Florence is the local recluse, Edmund Brundage, played effectively and quietly by Bill Nighy. Edmund makes contact with Florence and she supplies some books, getting him interested in the works of Ray Bradbury (especially Fahernheit 451 and the story of book burning) and asking his advice as to the literary quality of Lolita and whether she should stock it.

The atmosphere of this film is very British, old-style. And audiences who appreciate going back into the lives of 20th century Britain will enjoy this. The performances are excellent, Emily Mortimer charming and determined as Florence,Bill Nighy, Patricia Clarkson, Heather Kneafsey, all quite persuasive. There is a local cad played by James Lance.

The film is told in voice-over, the voice being that of Julie Christie. And, at the end, it is revealed who her character is.

As with so many British stories, there are bittersweet tones in the film which also make it engaging if sometimes saddening.

1. The title, the focus on books, readers, the imagination?

2. The adaptation of the novel, autobiographical? The 20th century, post-World War II, Europe? The English counties, the coast (and Irish locations)? The British coastal town, the coast and the water? Homes, shops, the familiar British setting? The musical score?

3. The narrative, the narrator, Christine speaking in retrospect? The voice of Julie Christie?

4. Introduction, 1959, Florence, her age, war widow, loving memories of her husband, meeting him at a bookshop, no children? A good character, strong, becoming a victim? The unhappy ending? Influencing the next generation and recording her memory?

5. Florence on the shore, reading, leaving her scarf behind, Edmund finding it and taking it? Her aim, using the Old House for the bookshop? Going to the bank, the teller, Mr Potatohead, the lawyer and his sinister look, no help? Mr Keble, the boat, helping with the plumbing, getting the shop ready, the advice, sending the scouts to help, getting the stock, setting up the shelves? Florence’s delight?

6. The invitation of the general and his wife? Florence getting the red dress, being persuaded of the car? At the reception, isolated, the general speaking to her, the delete wealthy citizens of the town? Mrs Gamart, her appearance, manner, with the guests? Wanting to talk to Florence? The issue of the Arts Centre – influence being advised to think it over (the implication that Mrs Gamart achieved what she wanted)? The meeting with Milo North and his suave manner, talking with him?

7. Florence determined, her set up, the note from Edmund Brundish, her sending him Fahrenheit 451 (and its significance about books, book burning, Philistines, reading, remembering stories and passages)? Wally delivering the messages? Christian’s mother and the invitation to visit, and a cake?

8. The shop established, difficulties, yet the customers coming? Christine and the interview, the best of the three sisters to work with Florence? The attitudes, intelligent, helping, but not reading? Maths and geography? Florence talking with her mother? Going to visit Edmund Brundish, wearing her red dress? Changing it?

9. The other books, sending more Ray Bradbury, the issue of Lolita and getting advice, his comment of the book, her buying 250 copies? And Milo North joking about Christine trying to sell it to the vicar? Christine and her admiring the Chinese tray, in Florence’s will – Florence giving it as a gift?

10. Milo North, a writer, Christine’s assessment of him and wanting to be like him to be more interesting, Milo talking with Florence, Cassie as his girlfriend, her leaving? His work in the shop? The double dealing, the documents and the difficulty of his health with the water in the basement of the shop?

11. Edmund Brundish, Florence coming to tea, the discussion, the cake, the truth about his wife the gossip in the town - her dying by drowning getting fruit to make him a cake? His not having seen her for 45 years? His regrets at not meeting Florence earlier?

12. Edmund coming to visit Mrs Gamart, the timing, control, her ideas, his accusations about her nephew and the influence of passing legislation about buildings, occupations? His severe but polite statements? Her reaction? His going outside, his heart attack, collapse, Florence and sadness? The funeral?

13. Florence to be ousted, the role of the lawyer, issues of finance, going to the bank man, issues of security, insurance, and insurance failing because of legislation? The water in the building unsuitable? Mrs Gamart getting her way?

14. Florence leaving, getting ready, the sadness, Christine with a copy of High Wind in Jamaica? And Christine setting the house on fire?

15. The final sequence with Christine, her admiration for Florence – but the regretful tone of the film?

UNSANE



US, 2018, 98 minutes, Colour.
Claire Foy, Joshua Leonard, Juno Temple, Jay Pharaoh, Amy Irving, Matt Damon.
Directed by Steven Soderbergh.

Do we actually use the word “unsane�? Is it something of a mixture of sane and insane? Can it imply that somebody can be sane and insane at the same time?

Director Steven Soderbergh, with a strong career in films, Cannes award for Sex, Lies and Videotape, and an Oscar for Traffic, decided that he would stop making films and turn his attention to television. His decision for a new direction in work did not last long and in 2017 he released Logan Lucky and in 2018, Unsane.

The star of the film is British Claire Foy, who made such an impression as the Queen in The Crown and appeared also in Breathe. We first see her in her office at a bank, in a Pennsylvania city, treating a phone client with some severity. The worker in the next desk comments on her harsh approach. However, Seymour (she explains her name, that she was called after her maternal grandfather) is a success at work, praised by the boss, suggesting she travel with him to a conference in New Orleans – though she seems to have a quizzical response, suggestive that he is being suggestive.

Then, she goes to a bar, meeting up with a man whom she had contacted through an app, seemingly permissive but then suddenly stopping. So far, perhaps so ordinary.

However, she has been troubled by a stalker for two years, moving away from her mother (Amy Irving) and from Boston. She decides to go to a therapist and explains her fears and answers questions about contemplating suicide. Suddenly, she is interned in an institution for 24 hours, the staff suspicious of her responses, rather Cuckoo’s Nest in their application of rules and regulations. She finds herself in a dormitory, tormented by the young woman in the next bed, Allison (Juno Temple).

An explanation is given that institutions like this are dependent on insurance income and can keep intended patients as inmates for as long as companies are prepared to pay the insurance. (To be a particular interest for Soderbergh who explored the exploitation of medication and institutions in his film, Side Effects, 2013.)

As the film develops, and Seymour finds herself confined, she denounces one of the workers as her stalker. The authorities say that he has been definitely checked and, in fact, he is in charge of the distribution of the medication each night.

At one stage, we might have been suspicious that all this was going on in Seymour’s head, that she had imagined the stalker. Yet, here it is (Joshua Leonard) and sometimes in charge of Seymour.

She does make friends with another inmate, Nate (Jay Pharaoh) who tells her about the insurance scams and lends her his mobile phone so that she can make contact with her mother who hurriedly drops everything at home and hurries to her daughter, making demands, taking strong stances.

The plot does get quite complicated as it goes on, Seymour and her dealings with the alleged stalker, his behaviour, his interactions with Nate, his plans for a happy life with Seymour.

There is plenty of melodrama here, especially in a final confrontation, police investigations, media investigations into the ethics of the institution…

And, with Seymour returning to work, and some of her behaviour, we begin to wonder what has really happened…

1. The title, the use of the word, its meaning, sane and insane at the same time?

2. The work of Steven Soderbergh, sex lies and…? His more recent concerns about mental and physical health, frauds, bureaucracy, exposes?

3. Pennsylvania, the city, the bank and offices, the streets, the park, the bar, the apartment?

4. The contrast with the institution, the interview room, reception, stripping room, dormitory, meals, lineup for medication, offices, basement? The countryside outside, the joggger, the dead body, the woods? The musical score?

5. Seymour’s story? Named after her grandfather? Seeing her on the phone, harsh towards client, the comments to Jill? The boss, his praising her report, the invitation to the conference in New Orleans? Her hesitation about her boss? Sexual innuendo? Her going to the bar, the online date, the promise of sex, the sudden stopping, locking herself in the bathroom?

6. Seymour and the ambiguity of her attitudes? Going to be interviewed by the psychologist, the questions, being listened to, the story of the stalker, question about thinking of suicide, her precise memories? Filling in the forms, signing her freedom away, the 24 hours? The style, the harsh attitudes, commands, handing over possessions, stripping, clothes, the room, the bed and the dormitory? The cuckoo’s nest and the Nurse Ratchet approaches?

7. The staff, Dennis, Seymour punching him? The doctor, the request for the phone call, calling the police, their indicating that they received many such calls, not coming?

8. In the dormitory, Violet, her manner, taunts? Jacob and his approach, her kicking him? Nate, friendly, the sound advice, the explanation of the institution, lending his phone to her?

9. The expose of the institution, the staff, training, behaviour, committing clients, the reasons, the insurance, prolonging the insurance income for profit? The manager, the pleasant manner? The police visit, her having Nate’s reporting notes? Nate being undercover, for the media, the role of the police, his records? The arrest of the manager?

10. Seymour, her experience, phoning her mother, the previous alienation from her mother, coming 400 miles from Boston, so fast, the visit, the mother’s firm stances, demands, seeing Seymour, the discussions, offering help, going to the motel? David coming to the door for management? Her not answering her phone?

11. The days, Seymour’s alignments, staying, Violet and the others, lining up for the pills, David giving her hallucinatory drugs? The effect?

12. David as George, on the staff, his reputation and check? Work, distributing the pills, the hallucinatory drug and its effect on her? Showing her the envelope with her mother’s address? Seymour publicly denouncing him? His murmuring sweet nothings to her, continuing the stalking?

13. Nate, Seymour telling her story to him, the flashbacks to David’s behaviour in Boston, his father, Seymour reading to him, the advances, stalking? Two years?

14. Nate, his personality, the phone, David taking him, to the basement, tying him up, the electric shock, the drugs, Seymour seeing the picture on the phone? Matt Damon and his cameo and questions?

15. The jogger, finding the body, the police, identifying it as George? David taking his place?

16. Seymour in the basement, David coming, the abduction, imprisoning her, the lengthy talks, his explanation of himself, the hut in the woods, her telling him about the real Seymour and his not seeing her? The using the trick, to have sex with Violet? Bringing her down, the shard, Seymour attacking him? His killing Violet?

17. Seymour getting out, being hit, in the boot of the car, getting out, David pursuing her through the woods, the emphasis on the blue from the beginning of the film and the blue colour of the woods? Seymour lying still, then attacking him?

18. Six months passing, having lunch with Jill and then firing her? Her promotion, hearing the voice, like David, thinking he was the stalker, taking her knife, the mistake, dropping the knife, the close-up on Seymour?

19. The twist in the plot, confusion about Seymour on the part of the audience, normal, fixated, the stalker, making it up, the reality of David in the institution, the sudden developments in the plot, the violence – and Seymour’s imagination?

STRANGE ILLUSION

1945, 87 minutes, Black-and-white.
Jimmy Lydon, Warren William, Sally Eilers, Regis Toomey, Charles Arnt.
Directed by Edgar G.Ulmer.

Strange Illusion is looked on with interest because of its director Edgar G Ulmer. This film was made directly before the film that is considered by some as his classic, Detour.

This is a small budget film but with some ambitions, an American setting 1945, the focus on the family of a judge who has been killed in an accident, his wife mourning him, thinking of remarrying a charming man, with a son who is still mourning his father and against his mother marrying again.

Yes, the film draws on Shakespeare’s Hamlet, some of the characters and their behaviour, some of the themes.

It opens with the visual superimpositions of some of the characters as well as a dream that the young man has about his father and his death, seeing characters as well as an isolated hut which he will discover in real life.

The young man is played by Jimmy Lydon who had a long career as Henry Aldritch in these years, had a long television career. His mother is played by Sally Eilers, the friendly doctor by Regis Toomey.

The suave cad is played by Warren William, a character bent on revenge against the judge and his whole family, intending to marry and then destroy his wife and her children.

There are some psychological complications when the young man is advised to go to a residential area to be cared for bya doctor – who is in cahoots with the villain.

This leads to all kinds of complications, giving fingerprints, tracing numberplates, the collaboration with the police while the cad is enticing the mother to get a marriage license, his motivation against her son, his being seductive towards her daughter.

1940s small-budget but interesting because of the director and the Hamlet parallels.

1. An interesting drama? The dramatic elements and characters? Title and expectations?

2. The director, his reputation, especially for thrillers in the 1940s and 50s?

3. The basis of the plot in Hamlet, the central character, his mother, his mother’s suitor, friends and advisers? However, while there are parallels, not strict parallels but rather application of Shakespeare’s themes and characters?

4. The dream, ominous, characters blending into each other – and the reprisal at the end and Paul’s freedom?

5. The atmosphere of the 1940s, black-and-white photography, homes, businesses, the chalet in the forest, the musical score?

6. The character of Paul, the Hamlet-figure? Initial dream, about his father and his death, the behaviour of his mother? Seeing details? His father, the crash, killed in an accident? His administration of justice? Paul’s mother, amiable, intrigued by Brett Curtis? Paul away with the doctor, fishing, his friendship with the doctor, psychological discussions? The news about his mother, his return? Preparation for studies? The bond with the doctor? His friend and not understanding the situation, his girlfriend and his relationship with her? His sister, especially supporting his mother? The family situation?

7. Paul’s mother, the death of her husband, genuine grief, going on with life? The encounter with Brett Curtis? Meeting, their discussions, the possibility of marriage, the issue of getting the marriage license, going to the office? Putting off the marriage? Her concern about Paul?

8. Paul and the doctor friend, getting the fingerprints, searching out Brett Curtis is identity, the number plate of the car, getting information, the role of the police?

9. Brett Curtis, suave manner, his doctor friend, the plot? His identity, motivation for revenge, on the whole family? Courting Paul’s mother, flirtatious? His different name, the experience of the courts, his smooth manner, yet his fatal attraction to young girls, behaviour? Especially Paul’s sister? His meeting with Paul, being suave and smooth?

10. The sinister doctor, friendship, his institution, Paul being taken there, a guest, but treated as a prisoner? The psychological repercussions? The activities of the Institute, the role of the secretary, seeing the binoculars, going onto the roof, Paul recognising the hut they could see? His drive with his doctor friend, discovering the parts of the truck? His being locked in his room, smashing his way out, the pursuit of Brett?

11. The police, the information, the fingerprint information, the car number plate and registration?

12. The cars, the pursuit, Brett and Paul sister, at the hut? Brett flirtatious, putting the girl in danger?

13. The doctor, his being pursued, arrested? Brett being arrested?

14. The evocation of the scenes from Hamlet?

DOVLATOV

Russia, 2018, 126 minutes, Colour.

Milan Maric, Artur Beschastny.
Directed by Aleksey German Jr.


This is a film of major appeal to Russians, aficionados of Russian cinema, and those who live in northern Europe. To others, the settings may seem quite remote, distant. And Russia in 1971 may seem even more distant, the post Stalin and Kruschev era, the era of Brezhnev, the control of the bureaucrats, censorship.
This is a comparatively long film especially for the audiences who are not drawn into the situations in the characters. The focus is on a writer, brought up in past decades, married and divorced, with a daughter. He finds it difficult to get published, being rejected by most magazines having to make a living by writing for in-house magazines for factories, social stories, reporting of a propaganda film made for the factory. He loathes this experience.

The film also shows other writers, poets, artists, or feeling the suppression – and gathering in bars for entertainment, music, talk, comparing notes, comparing regrets and frustrations.

There is a particular colour tone to the film, not bright at all, suggesting some of the toning down of life in that era.

Most audiences will accept the film is fiction, the story of writers, poets and artists of the clamping down their experience. It also shows the bureaucrats, their views, interviews, threats. It is very much a period of socialist ideology. There is an emphasis on workers, factories, socialist issues.

It is only at the end of the film, with information given about one of the chief characters, Jack Brodsky, Russian poet, exiled to the United States, Novell literature prize winner in 1987, indicates to non-aware viewers that this is not exactly fiction.

In fact, the title character was real. However, his story doesn’t demand full attention. He seems rather self-centred, more than a touch narcissist at times, giving his views, not exactly a great listener to others or it is met with his ex-wife and his daughter, and communicate with his mother. But, one of the things we do not see him do, hear about only, is his writing.

So, it comes as rather a shock when the final information is given that he went to the United States, died in his late 40s and, after the fall of the Soviet Union, is considered one of Russia’s greatest writers. The film does not quite give the evidence for this – rather giving the difficulties is background and life in the 1970s and 1980s.

AGA

Bulgaria, Germany, France, 2018, 91 minutes, Colour.
Directed by Milko Lazarov.


This is an ethnographical film, portraying the life of Eskimos in the Arctic Circle as well as focusing on the changes in temperature, availability of animals for hunting, mysterious deaths of animals, and the younger generation moving into the city and to different kinds of work.

As with this kind of film, the cinematography is beautiful and vibrant, wide screen. It opens with scenes of the tundra, the lone man with his dog and sled traversing the screen. The film focuses on the man, older, living alone with his wife who is ill. There is a great deal of detail for those who like this kind of documentary, close-up of the couple, their communication, their being busy all the time with tasks in the home as well as preparation for the hunt, the wife making a hat from the skin of a dead furry animal, attempts at fishing in ice holes…

The son has gone to the city but does pay them a visit with news of other relatives.

The couple endure a heavy storm, putting great strain on the wife who recounts a dream she has about meeting a polar bear, turning into a young man, his inviting her to his home, it being a vast hole, very deep, with all the stars of the heavens, where she loses her memory and her consciousness. It is clearly a premonition of death.

When his wife dies, the older man decides to visit his daughter with whom the parents have quarrelled, Aga. He travels along way, spring coming on and, instead of snow and mountainous rocks, there are hills with trees, a road with a truck driver and a logging load, his finding the diamond mine where his daughter works, an extraordinary excavation, truck tracks on the sides of the mountain. He eventually sees his daughter. She weeps. And the camera with a helicopter crane sequence lifts out of the vast mountain up into the air, over the works, over the town, over the modern world.

The film makes the point that the Eskimos lived an ancient way for centuries but this is now coming to an end with the younger generation moving out and into the cities as well as the effects of climate change.


AGA

Bulgaria, 2018, 95 minutes, Colour.
Mikhail Aprosimov, Feodosius Ivanova, Sergei Egorov.
Directed by Milko Lazarov.

Back in 1922, veteran documentary filmmaker, Robert Flaherty a pioneer in this kind of documentary, went to the Arctic and made the classic, Nanook of the North. This documentary, almost 100 years later, pays tribute to the classic by naming its central character, Nanook.

This time the location is in Arctic Russia, the snowclad open steppes, the high rock outcrops, some sparse vegetation. This is a world away from most audiences.

The special appeal of this documentary will be to those who like those studies which might be described as anthropological. The filmmakers go into what is a remote area for most of us, present us with extraordinary visuals, the range of seasons and their effect, the survival activities for food and shelter, the tent living quarters and the interiors, the boring of holes in the ice for fishing, the sightings of the reindeer. Again, audiences will relish the time spent in the surroundings but they will also be warming to the two central characters, now elderly, their children having gone to the cities or to industries beyond the steppes.

Nanook is ageing, a bulky man, with his sled and faithful hound, travelling the snow and ice, fishing, often without success, looking for the reindeer. His wife, Sedna, cooks, sews, mends, reminisces with her husband about the old days, about their children, relatives. They love each other, good company for each other. At one moment, we Sedna preparing a salve and revealing an unhealthy growth on her body which will have dire consequences.

In the latter part of the film, Nanook goes to visit his daughter who works in a diamond mine kilometres away. He gets a lift with a very chubby, genially heavy, log driver, quite a long drive by day and night, encountering the Russian guards with their demands for documents, but who also give advice about the weather and conditions on the strength and weaknesses of the ice.

By the end, we have left the steps behind and see the vastness of the mine, the huge cavity in the earth, industrial smoke, the huge vehicles, the overview of the town surrounding the mine – and the realisation that the isolated past is receding more and more into the past and here is an image of the future.

1. An anthropological documentary? Audience response?

2. The landscapes, snow and ice, the vastness, flat steppes, rock outcrops, some vegetation? Digging the holes for fishing? The sight of the reindeer?

3. Nanook, his age, with his sled and dog, the hole for fishing, not finding fish for many days? His wife, her age, the memories of her children and the departure to the cities? Their friendship, love, comfort?

4. Nanook’s wife, in the tent, the tasks at home, the cooking, mending? Her growth and the salving it? The pathos of her death? Her love her husband, the conversations and memories?

5. Nanook moving, going to see his daughter, the huge truck and the logging, the large driver, the music, chatting, day and night, the Russian guards, the documents, the warning about the ice?

6. Life on the steppes and its being remote, from the past? The truck, on the road, the music? Into the modern world?

7. The incident with the killing of the reindeer, the mechanism to load it on the back of the truck?

8. Nanook and his walking to the mine? His daughter, hard hat, at work, dropping the hat, seeing her father, intimations of grief? Tears? The reunion of father and daughter?

9. The final visuals of the vast hole in the ground for the mine, the landscapes on the side of the mountain, the vehicles? The machines?

10. The final vistas from the air, the homes, the streets, the vehicles – and Nanook now in the 21st century?

TINTA BRUTA/ HARD PAINT

Brazil, 2018 118 minutes, Colour.
Shico Menegat, Bruno Fernandes.
Directed by Filzembacher, Marcio Realon.


A Brazilian film, set in the northern town of Porto Alegre.

The central character is a young gay man, Pedro, rather introverted, making his living by the Internet, his own website with paying viewers. His specialty is painting himself with a variety of luminescent colours. He is supported by his sister, a journalist, to whom he has been close since they were children. He also has a good relationship with his grandmother.

He is in difficulties because he was bullied as a child, tormented at college, dropping out of his course, taunted and suddenly breaking out in anger at one of the bullies, piercing his eye and blinding him. He is about to go to a court case, being advised by lawyers to be honest about the situation and the taunts – but careful about the prejudices of the judge.

As his customers drop off, he encounters a hopeful-dancer, Leo, with whom he formed forms a bond. In fact, Leo joins him online with performance – some of which is quite explicit.

Leo has an ambition to get a scholarship to train in dancing in Argentina but misses out, one of his close group of friends getting the scholarship. As he and Pedro continue their relationship, a strong affection between the two, it emerges that Leo has been offered another scholarship, this time in Berlin, and intends to go.

At a party, Pedro leaves early and is followed by some gay-bashers and he is involved in a fight with him, Leo coming to his rescue.

There is a sequence with a twist when he goes to a bar and thinks he is being picked up by a customer only to find, after the sexual encounter, that the man was picking him up and demands money. Once again, Pedro breaks out in violence against the man.

He has some time alone with Leo before his departure but then is left on his own, a broken relationship, facing the court case – and eventually weeping. It is over two and the audience to imagine his future.


There is quite some pathos and empathy for the characters – and both Pedro and Leo are played by actors in the first film role.