CHIHWASEON/ PAINTED FIRE

Korea, 2002, 120 minutes, Colour.
Min-sik Choi.
Directed by Kwon-taek Im.

A fascinating invitation to venture back into 19th century Korean history, a time of social collapse, ill-fated reformist movements and peasant uprisings with diplomatic and military interventions from China and Japan.

This background is well explained for the audience unfamiliar with this part of the world. But it is still background.

In the foreground is the life and work of a peasant artist, 'Ohwon' Jang Seung Up, who was a child prodigy in his ability to paint and to recreate pictures from memory and who eventually was commissioned by the king. This is one of the best biographies of a painter in telling the details of his life and art, warts (alcohol) and all as well as showing the artist at work and explaining the styles and techniques of Korean tradition and how Ohwon used them as well as transcended them.

In showing the world of nature that inspired Ohwon, the film is beautiful to watch.

1. A Korean experience? History, art, the 19 century?

2. The importance of the art, the visuals, the paintings themselves, colour and style, compositions? The title: Painted Fire?

3. Korea in the 19 century, the settings, costumes and decor, ordinary people, aristocracy, palaces, studios? The musical score?

4. The historical background, the persecution of Jews one, peasant revolts, clashes with the Japanese, Japanese occupation?

5. The narrative: Ohwon and his art, the Japanese buyer, the discussion, the flashbacks?

6. The artist as a boy, common, encountering the aristocrat, patronage, his dealings with the ruling class, favours?

7. Korean art and culture, the artist influenced by Chinese models? Distinctively Korean? Subject, style?
8. The personality of the artist, age, growing older? Lecherous, focus on sex and sexuality, the courtesans? Relationships? His drinking? His moods and frustrations? His being confined by his patrons? The clashes with them?

9. The cumulative effect of watching the film, appreciation of the artist, understanding him? His art? Distinctive? Contribution to Korean history and culture?

YAZGI/ FATE

Turkey, 2001, 119 minutes, Colour.
Serdar Orcin, Zeynep Tokus.
Directed by Zeki Demirkubuz.

The first of a series of 'Tales of Darkness' from Turkish writer-director, Zeki Demirkubuz and loosely based on Camus' The Outsider. However, rather than being the Everyman who does not believe in God but in humanity, finding nobility in this faith, the hero in modern Istanbul simply seems a passive, can't be bothered, detached bystander in the drama of life. His passionless acceptance of his mother's death, the non-involvement in his marriage and his not defending himself against false charges of murder seem matters of supreme indifference.

It is only in a long two-hander sequence where the prosecutor tries to understand him do any of Camus' deeper issues surface and the protagonist shows any sign of life. But it doesn't seem to last when he returns home to his sofa and television.

1. A Turkish adaptation of The Outsider by Albert Camus? The title? Fatalistic?

2. The city, the officers, the apartments? The prison? The musical score?

3. Musa, his age, shipping clerk, the accounts? In himself? Living with his mother? The relationship with the woman in the office? His decision to marry her? Without love? His indifference towards his mother, her death, leaving her corpse in the house, going to work? Not being able to mourn? The funeral? His marriage, loveless?

4. His boss, his wife, the murder, the charge?

5. The conviction, the sentence? The importance of the discussion with the warder? His not having any beliefs, no faith in people, no faith in the universe?

6. The blend of black humour themes with the seriousness of the portrait and the challenge of a person indifferent to everything?

MY WIFE IS AN ACTRESS/ MA FEMME EST UNE ACTRICE

France, 2001, 95 minutes, Colour.
Charlotte Gainsbourg, Yvan Attal, Terence Stamp, Noemie Lvovski, Keith Allen, Ludivine Sagnier.
Directed by Yvan Attal.

There is a lot to like in this easy-going comedy about what it is to be a celebrity - and what it is like to be the unknown spouse of that celebrity. In fact, Charlotte Gainsbourg is charming as the famous film star, Charlotte, always being asked for photographs, victim of media speculation about her relationships, devoted to her husband, wanting a baby. But, Yvan Attal, as Yvan her sports reporter husband, is not charming at all even though he wants to be. He is easily provoked by the fans, can become suspicious, even jealous, while he commutes between Paris and London while she is filming with John, Terence Stamp. In the lack of charm stakes, Yvan is outdone by his gratingly strident sister, Nathalie, who is pregnant and defiantly Jewish against all comers, including her inoffensive husband. That's the picture - and it is all done with Gallic spirit, humour and wry observation.

What makes it all the more arresting is that Charlotte Gainsbourg and Yvan Attal are, in fact, husband and wife - although, in real life, Attal is better known than his cinema character, Yvan. In fact, Attal himself has written and directed the film, giving the morose and jealous lines to himself. While we enjoy the surface of the film, we can't help trying to read between the lines. And, to repeat, Charlotte Gainsbourg is charming.

1. The title? The focus on “my� and Yvan’s experience? The focus on the actress, Charlotte and her life and career? The background of the actors being partners in real life?

2. The Paris settings, London settings, the Channel train? The world of the media, moviemaking and promotion? Sports writing, sports casting? Homes and apartments, movie sets, restaurants? The musical score?

3. The couple, the irony of the title, the writer and his reputation? The actress and her reputation? Their careers, prominence? Life together, the fans and their intrusions, autographs, policeman and tickets and being benign, Charlotte able to get restaurant reservations? Who was controlling the couple? Who made the decisions?

4. Yvan, in himself, his work, interests, attitude towards his wife, living with her celebrity?

5. Charlotte, in herself, her work, with fellow actors, the French, the British, with John? The director and his conditions for her performing nude?

6. Yvan being asked the question about his wife, nude, making love on screen? His doubts, increasing, his going to London and back?

7. John, the film star, the matinee idol, Terence Stamp and his style, age, sexual reputation? His wife and relationships?

8. The sister, the emphasis on the Jewish background, her husband and the issue of circumcision, her pregnancy and the birth of the baby?

9. Supporting characters, the English director and his assistant? The young actress and her contribution?

10. The ending, with Charlotte was telling a lie or not? French attitudes towards sexuality and affairs? Telling a lie or not and whether she was a good actress or not? And the prospect of a baby?

MY LITTLE EYE

UK, US/Canada, 2002, 95 minutes, Colour.
Sean C.W.Johnson, Kris Lemche, Stephen O' Reilly, Laura Regan, Jennifer Sky, Bradley Cooper.
Directed by Marc Evans.

After the critiques of audiences being voyeuristic in their television watching (The Truman Show, EdTV, Pleasantville), television itself became more real than real with the spate of programs like Big Brother, Survivor which dubbed themselves 'reality tv'. Audiences were caught up in the personalities, their characters and idiosyncracies and hurried to add their phone votes to exclude the competitors they loathed and buoy up their favourites to win big money. A small American film of 2000, Series 7 - The Contenders, took the imagination a step further with a show where the competitors took the excluding of others into their own hands: they tracked, outwitted and killed their opponents.

Now comes a small British film, made in Nova Scotia with an American cast, which takes reality tv even further - to the Internet. Filmed with several video cameras, the film is edited from a wide selection of shots, all of which are the equivalent of the view from a surveillance camera. This gives the film a rough and ready, realistic look as video and live internet broadcast material.

Five young adults agree to live in a house together for six months. Towards the end, even though they seem to have survived well enough, things go awry with mysterious parcels, an even more mysterious visitor, and deaths. It is the IT equivalent of those old dark house thrillers, except that this is real and is being downloaded on subscribers' computer screens.

Bradley Cooper, at the beginning of his career, moved into television but later a successful career in movies.

Watching it all is a very uncomfortable experience, especially when director Marc Evans uses moody sounds to unsettle us, indistinct dark images and a couple of nasty shocks. In fact, the whole thing is a rather nasty caution about being gullible and about the unscrupulous clients who want to see a pornography of violence.

1. Thriller? The genre of The Old Dark House? The elimination of various characters?

2. The era of social media, programs on Internet, websites?

3. The found footage style, popular at the time, the use of handheld camera, different angles, Web Cam and bleached colour, white noise and sound, contribution to the atmosphere of the film?

4. The popularity of reality TV? Big Brother and similar programs? Issues of who organises and produces these programs? Who finances? What are the motivations for people to agree to the conditions and participate? Who watches the programs?

5. The situation, five young people, for six months, in the house? A million-dollar prize? The conditions, all having to stay? The setup for audience anticipation, for thrills, the mystery?

6. The five young people, the characters, typical, men, women? The personalities? Interactions? Time passing, boredom, tensions?

7. Pressures to leave, the death of the grandfather, the grandson wanting to leave? The money? The pressure from the others? The visitor, not knowing about the program? The policeman?

8. The change of atmosphere, blood, knives, deaths?

9. The intricacy of the mystery? Responsibility? Tension, the solution?

RUN


Ivory Coast, 2014, 100 minutes, Colour.
Abdul Karim, Konate, Isaach de Bankole, Reiine Sali Coulibaly.
Directed by Philippe Lacote.

This is the summary written by the writer-director:
Run escapes... He just killed the Prime Minister of his country. In order to do so, he had to act as if he was a crazy man, wandering through the city. His life comes back by flashes ; his childhood with Tourou when his dream was to become a rain miracle-worker, his adventures with Gladys the eater, and his past as a young member of militia, in the heart of the politic and military conflict in Ivory Coast. All those lives, Run didn't choose them. Everytime, he felt in by running from another life. That's the reason why his name's Run. Written by Philippe Lacôte

This film was nominated for consideration for Oscar for Best Foreign Language Film, 2014. It was made in the Ivory Coast, the director coming from the capital, Abidjan, and the main actors also from Ivory Coast.

There is political unrest in the background, echoes of military coups and uprisings in the early 21st century.

However, the film focuses on a young man who walks into a gathering with a gun and shoots the Prime Minister. As he escapes and tries to mingle with the crowd, he experiences flashbacks to his early life, leading, once again, to his attack on the Prime Minister.

The film shows Run’s life as a little boy, his apprenticeship to a rain-maker, his desire to become a rain-maker, his not succeeding, but his being forced to execute his mentor. A large part of the film shows his friendship with the very large, Gladys, who goes around the countryside with her special talent, eating, with Run as her spruiker. He also becomes involved in the young militia, doing various jobs for the leader, The Admiral – but also getting in with revolutionaries which leads to his assassination attempt.

1. A film from the Ivory Coast? Director and performers? Story and characters? The background of militia and civil unrest in the 21st century?

2. The local settings, the Ivory Coast countryside, the cities, political meetings, slums? Travelling performance? The militia gatherings? The assassination venue? The musical score?

3. The film as a portrait of Run? From the Ivory Coast? The opening with his marching into the assembly, the gun, in his mind, killing the elephant, shooting the Prime Minister? His appearance, headband, running, through the town washing, changing his clothes, mingling? His motivations? His name – and for each phase of his life, running?

4. The flashbacks, as a little boy, his ambitions at apprenticeship, with his mentor, the rain-making, the failure? The bond? The people, wanting rain? The assembly, the execution of the rain-maker? His lonely background? Growing older, meeting Gladys, travelling with her, her performance, helping him grow up, friendship and support? Her failure, not recognising him and his escape? Going to the militia, the motivation, the other young men, the leaders, The Admiral, getting jobs, cleaning the car, mixing with revolutionaries, with Assa? The motivations, leading to the assassination attempt?

5. Gladys, large, eating, travelling around, her performance, people coming to see her, Run as her spruiker, encouraging audiences? Travelling with Run? Mentoring him? Her beginning to fail, the child taking the food? The attempted performance, Run and his anonymity, his fleeing?

6. The Admiral, the militia, with the young men, the tasks, his ambitions?

7. The revolutionaries, Assa, with Run? The bonds? Leading to motivation?

8. After the assassination, hiding, his being washed, the photo, his new identity?

9. Interesting perceptions on life in the Ivory Coast, social, political?

Aaaaaaaah!

UK, 2015, 79 minutes, Colour.
Julian Barrett, Noel Fielding.
Directed by Steve Oram.

The director, Steve Oram, is quoted as saying that he saw a documentary about apes and their attacks on each other which gave an inspiration to speculate in a film about what would happen if humans behave like apes, talk, manners, aggressive behaviour, and how society would exist.

While the idea is novel (except for all the films from the Planet of the Apes), the execution will be difficult to sit through for most audiences. The actors perform very well, grunting, finding animal sounds the equivalent of human speech and communication, being in situations which look human but have animal behaviour.

The performances have a great deal of humour but the underlying idea is serious.

On the other hand, audiences who like something really novel, really off-beat, have found this film to quote one fan “insane but great�.

While some audiences might admire some of the great aspects, many find it too much, too insane, to sit through.

CHRISTIE MALRY'S OWN DOUBLE ENTRY

UK, 2002, 89 minutes, Colour.
Nick Moran, Neil Stuke, Kate Ashfield, Shirley Anne Field.
Directed by Paul Tickell.

This low-budget British drama received minimal release while winning critical acclaim. For the general audience it is tough going.

It is based on a 1970s novel whose author, B.S.Johnson, killed himself after its publication. Johnson was a critic of capitalist society and the film, adapted to the 1990s, shows an ordinary London citizen, put down at every turn, using the means of the banking system and the capitalist society to overthrow it. He becomes an urban terrorist which, in the context of recent world events, makes it even more alarming.

B.S.Johnson was intrigued by the work of a 14th century Franciscan who invented double entry accounting. The screenplay intercuts many Italian sequences into its modern story, showing the work of the friar as well as scenes at the court of Milan with Leonardo Da Vinci.

Audiences have to work hard to put the two worlds together. On its own, the modern story shows the progress of Christie Malry, the timid clerk, bucking the system and becoming a deadly nihilist, even poisoning the west London water supply. While he does die by his own weapon (a bomb), the film charts his spiral with a certain anarchic glee.

DOG DAYS/ HUNDSTAGE


Austria, 2001, 121 minutes, Colour.
Maria Hofstaetter.
Directed by Ulrich Seidl.

If you took a cross section of Austrian citizens and looked at what they do in some detail over a couple of days, the result would be something like Dog Days.

Reality TV has in recent years cultivated a certain prurience in our viewing. We tend to be mesmerised by odd characters, bizarre situations and our curiosity is roused by behaviour which is not like our own. Director Ulrich Seidl is a documentary film-maker. He certainly brings his observant eye to the goings on on these hot dog days in a Vienna suburban estate.

The characters range from

a security alarm salesman who is on the alert for someone who has been scratching the local cars, a woman who visits a sex club,

her masseur and her unobtrusive husband,

an old man who wants his elderly housekeeper to wear his dead wife's clothes,

a schoolteacher who is involved with a drunken and brutal lout and his friend.

These characters are played by amateurs. The most puzzling and irritating character is played by a professional actress. She is Anna who spends every day getting lifts from customers at a supermarket. She insists on playing her favourite tape and talking incessantly, bluntly and rudely. She acts as a kind of chorus to the experiences of the dog days. Much of the film makes wearing watching, much of it is repellent, but all of it offers a glimpse of life behind suburban fences and walls.

NINE LIVES/ MR FUZZYPANTS

US/France, 2016, 85 minutes, Colour.
Kevin Spacey, Jennifer Garner, Robbie Amell, Cheryl Hines, Mark Consuelos, Melina Weissman, Christopher Walken.
Directed by Barry Sonnenfeld.

A number of reviewers were surprised to find Kevin Spacey in a film like this!
The American title is rather sober, indicating the theme of cats, Nine Lives, but overseas there was the more family and children-friendly title, Mr Fuzzypants. This is the name of the cat at the centre of the film.

Direction is by Barry Sonnenfeld whose major films include Get Shorty, Wild, Wild, West and the Men in Black series.

This is a fantasy for a family audience – some of its themes and treatment might go over the heads of younger children. However, it is probably important for parents to see it, especially with children, as the moral of the story is that adults can be far too busy, job and money preoccupied, not giving enough attention and love to their spouse or to their children.

Kevin Spacey is an ambitious businessman who wants to have the highest skyscraper in North America. He is arrogant in his manner, has built up a company all by himself, his associate wants to sell but he himself wants to own the highest building. Jennifer Garner plays his wife whom he loves but often neglects for his work. Malina Weissman is his daughter, turning 11, loving her father but anxious for his presence. Robbie Amell is his son, who works with him, but has been brought up by his ex-wife, played by Cheryl Hines. The son wants to prove himself to his father.

The key aspect of the film is the businessman deciding that he will give his daughter the cat that she wants for her birthday, visiting an eccentric shop run by Christopher Walken in his eccentric mode (even at one stage doing a little dancing jig is always). The main point is that the businessman, struck by lightning, enters into the cat, Mr Fuzzypants and spends most of the film trying to communicate with his wife and daughter, be concerned about the business deals and the building. This provides a great deal of comic situations and some farcical humour.

All’s well that ends well, of course.

1. The focus on cats? Humans and cats? Humans inhabiting cats?

2. New York, apartments, offices? Skyscraper? Cat shop? Hospital? Atmosphere? Musical score?

3. The title, cats with nine lives? Mr Fuzzypants as a cat, inhabited by Tom Brand?

4. The opening credits, the focus on the cats? The place of cats throughout the film? Tom and his dislike of cats? Rebecca wanting a cat for her birthday? Felix Perkins and his shop? The range of cats? Mr Fuzzypants and his behaviour, antics, communication, his look? As embodying Tom? The finale with Ian going into a cat?

5. Tom Brand, Kevin Spacey enjoying himself in a film like this? The opening, his jumping and hang gliding, landing for the press conference, his ambitions with his building, wanting it to be the tallest in North America, condemning Chicago? His manner, arrogance, the board meeting and his treatment of the members? His interactions with Ian and Ian wanting to sell the company? His son David, not doing the jump, his work in the office? His relationship with Lara, her phone calls, his being busy? The issue of Rebecca’s birthday, the gift? His discussing a gift at the board meeting? Being urged to ask what she wanted? At home, her looking at him on the television so many times, wanting his presence, asking for the cat?

6. The touch of magic? Christopher Walken as Mr Perkins, his eccentric manner, threatening Tom, the cat, the lightning, Tom and the transformation? Mr Perkins and his visiting, the discussions with the cat? The visit of Rebecca, her happiness with the cat, his doing a jig? Coming at the end, liberating Tom? Ian and his being hit by the van, going into the cat?

7. Tom in the form of the cat, the voice-over, his exasperation, unable to communicate? At home, with Rebecca, with Lara and her puzzlement? His trying to write with a pen, other means of communication, his name with the wool?

8. The scene on the roof, with the cat, the confrontation with Ian? The lightning, his falling, Ian letting him go? Ian later pretending that he tried to save him? Ian and his double dealings, the members of the board? The clash with David, dismissing him?

9. Madison and her daughter, her memories of being married to Tom, the divorce, her sardonic remarks? Friendship with Lara, the visits? The two little girls together, playing, clashes?

10. David, his hopes of impressing his father, working in the office? The documents? Being ousted by Ian? Seeing himself as a failure, going to the roof of the building? His jump, the hang gliding, his success? Tom and his concern, as the cat, jumping after him?

11. Lara, her friendship with Josh, the revelation that she wanted to leave Tom, the possibility of buying the house, yet her love for him, wanting him to be present to their daughter?

12. The theme of transformation, Tom not able to be so busy, so arrogant, spending time with Lara, getting to know Rebecca better, sharing with her, her sense that he was in the cat? The visit to Mr Perkins?

13. Tom, his recovery, with Rebecca, a happy future?

14. The message for busy parents and the need for time and space love for their children?



This is an entertaining fantasy for a younger audience – but the main message is actually for an adult audience, especially for busy fathers. It is the same message that was dramatised in such films as Steven Spielberg’s Hook or Ewan Mc Gregor as Christopher Robin. It is seen in such films as The Family Man with Gerard Butler.

There is more than a touch of spoof in the presentation of the self-made millionaire, Tom Brand, doing skydives into press conferences, trying to build the tallest building in the world (with some rivalry from Chicago). He is divorced (though his former wife, Cheryl Hines, and his daughter visit the house for social occasions). One of his business associates has a plan to make the firm go public and for it to be sold. Brand is also the patron of various charities, especially those of his wife, Jennifer Garner. He neglects his daughter who idolises him.

A crisis comes when his board discusses the present he should buy for his daughter’s birthday – to ask her. She wants a cat. So he goes to a mysterious cat shop which is managed by Christopher Walken who steals all the scenes that he is in (and, as always, does a little jig dance).

Then it becomes one of those films where the soul of one character goes into the other, and vice versa. Tom Brand becomes the cat, Mr Fuzzypants, while his body lies in coma in hospital. His owner’s son from his first marriage, David (Robbie Amell) tries to do his best in the firm but is neglected by his father who wants him to do a skydive as he did. While his father is in coma, David tries to rescue the company, make suggestions about how the New York building could be taller.

Much of the entertainment, of course, is in the behaviour of the cat, make a mess at home, with voice-over to the audience, trying to create messages, using his first wife’s purse as a litter box, disdaining food but enjoying alcohol, learning more and more about his family, the company, about the double dealings. Christopher Walken also visits and has conversations with him, getting him to appreciate why he has become a cat.

The film builds up to a climax, David going to the top of the building, seen on television, audience assuming he is going to kill himself but, of course, he does a skydive. Mr Fuzzypants sacrifices his daughter’s sadness at losing him as he races out the door to be with his son.

And, of course, the villain of the piece is hit by a car, Christopher Walken close by and the schemer becoming a cat!

A bit of a surprise to find Kevin Spacey this kind of film but he manages to enjoy it.

THE GREASY STRANGLER

US, 2016, 93 minutes, Colour.
Michael St Michaels, Sky Elobar, Elizabeth De Razzo, Gil Gex.
Directed by Jim Hosking.

There is no major reason for seeing this film – nor, perhaps, a minor reason. Its main appeal is to audiences of cult movies which tend to defy conventions in plot, characters, themes and moviemaking style.

Jim Hosking is British but has made this film in Los Angeles. He has assembled a cast, many of whom are amateurs, and his direction seems to be minimal so that many are very awkward in their lines and in their delivery. This even applies to the central character, the greasy strangler, played by Michael St Michaels, as well as to the supporting character, his son, played by Sky Elobar.

The adjectives to describe this film tend to be weird, bizarre, gross…

Whatever there is a plot concerns Big Ronnie, Michael St Michaels, the father of Big Braden, Sky Elobar. They live in dingy surroundings, the son cooking for his father who wants the greasiest possible of all meals. Each is eccentricity personified.

Dressed in pink, they take tourists on an alleged music tour in Los Angeles, the main scene taking place outside a doorway where they claim the Bee Gees composed the lyrics of one of their songs. Some of the tourist demand free drinks as promised but they refused. Others are just bemused.

Then, for no apparent reason, Big Ronnie transforms into a monstrous freak creature, naked but greasy (Big Ronnie being prone to appear naked while his son generally wears briefs). The tourists are all murdered, brutally but with some rather cheapskate special effects.

However, one of the tourist, a biggish girl, Janet, is attracted to the son but turns out to be more promiscuous than she might have thought and has a liaison with the father – both of them turning on her in disgust.

Another character, Big Paul, who resembles Big Ronnie, turns up for heart-to-heart chats.

There is a comment that 45 minutes was edited out of the film, perhaps a relief for those who really don’t like it, but the cause of anguish for those who do. However, by the end of the film, the son has become another greasy killer and they comb the countryside, seeking victims, making peace with each other, and eventually deciding to go and kill the man with whom big Ronnie’s wife has gone off.

Even some of the fans made the remark that they felt like having a shower after watching this film!