LAND OF MINE

Denmark, 2016, 100 minutes, Colour.
Roland Moeller, Oskar Boekelmann, Emil Belton, Oskar Belton.
Directed by Martin Zandvliet.

Land of Mine has an ambiguous title. It is a Danish film and, as Carl the sergeant in charge of the squad defusing the mines, after bashing a German soldier holding the Danish flag, declares: this is my country. And, with the beach setting, with over 1 million mindset on the Danish coast, Denmark is a land of mines.

This film has won many Danish awards and was Denmark’s official entry for the Oscars for Best Foreign Language Film.

There have been many war stories and many post-war stories but this one has not been told very often. Denmark was occupied by Germany for five years. There were huge resentments in Denmark against the Germans as evidenced in this film. The final credits indicate that there were over 2000 prisoners of war still in Denmark in 1945 and that they were put to work, especially in defusing the mines along the Danish coast.

This is a story of a small squad of German soldiers. However, it is evident that they are young boys, conscripted, forced to fight, very Germanic in their obeying orders, even from Carl the sergeant, taken prisoner but having very limited experience. (As a point of reference and comparison, they are the same age at the end of the war as Joseph Ratzinger and a reminder of boys being forced into Nazi youth groups – which means that any of them who are alive today are now 90.)

The group of ten are allotted a particular section beach, a map with the placement of all the mines, their work to meticulously make progress along the beach, metre by metre, poking four times to try to locate the mines. We have seen them practising defusing, being urged on by the Danish officer who has only contempt for the men, then defusing actual mines. As the days go on, with the prospect of three months to finish this section of the beach, they become more proficient. As might be expected, there are some explosions, some loss of limbs and death and the discovery that sometimes two mines could be placed one on top of the other.

In the meantime, we get to know more and more about the boys – which makes the film quite an experience as our sympathy causes us to imagine what it might be like in such a prisoner situation and in such a dangerous role in the defusing.

The boys have very limited experience and have hopes for work when they return home. They are sequestered in their heart, locked in at night, very little food, an episode in stealing food from the barn results in rat poisoning, a certain camaraderie in their interactions.

The character of Carl, the sergeant, is very interesting, hostile as is seen from the beginning, treating them as prisoners and not as persons, supervising their work, locking them in, but concerned when one boy is injured and he takes him to hospital. He becomes conscious of their lack of food and gets bread and vegetables from the store, criticised by fellow officers. He begins to talk with the boys as persons, even setting up a soccer match. He himself is a loner but is devoted to his companion dog.

At the farm, there is a woman with a young daughter, hostile to the Germans, more than satisfied at injuring some when she learns that they have been affected by the rat poison.

While the film shows and explores the character of the boys, highlighted by twins and their bond with each other, it also shows us the character of Carl, with touches, perhaps, of the reverse of the Stockholm Syndrome, his beginning to identify with his prisoners. His is a journey from harshness to humanity.

In many ways a severe watch, but a film well worth watching.

1. Awards in Denmark, International, Oscar nomination?

2. The title, mine as regards Denmark? Mine and mines?

3. The location photography, the West Coast of Denmark, the dunes, the beaches? The camp? The musical score?

4. Post-war stories, occupied Denmark, the defeat of Germany, the prisoners of war still in Denmark? Their role, especially in defusing mines? The final information, 2000 prisoners of war, half dying?

5. The introduction to the German men, walking in files on the road, Carl and his jeep, the German with the Danish flag, Carl punching him, bashing him, saying that this was his country, setting a tone for the film?

6. The mine squads, and the training, young men, boys, the pace of practice in defusing? With the real mines? A final explosion?

7. The men, young, boys? Age, soldiers, participation in the war? As prisoners of war, Germanic and obeying orders? The squad, the different personalities, Ludwig as leader, the twins and their bonding, Helmut and his aloofness, Wilhelm and his dying? Standing in file, the introduction to Carl, their names, his harshness? The location, their hut, near the farm, the lack of food, their being locked in?

8. The work, the numbers of mines, the map, the zones, teamwork, the meticulous prodding of the sand, the defusing? The routines, the lack of food, the twins stealing the bread from the little girl? The search for food, the barn, the rat poison, their being sick? Moments of relaxation? Discussions amongst themselves, their future, expectations are what home would be like? The limited experience, not appreciating what the war did to Germany?

9. The boy with the preparation of his grid, Carl’s lack of interest?

10. Elizabeth, her mother concerned, the rat poison, the mother and a satisfaction with finally injuring Germans? The twins, mending Elizabeth’s doll? Elizabeth sitting in the minefield, Ernst and his niceness, walking to Elizabeth, mending the doll, the continued grief about his brother’s death, not able to find his remains? Walking into the minefield and the explosion?

11. Carl, supervision, sternness, not caring for the boys? When sick, injections? The different reactions?

12. Wilhelm, the explosion, severed limbs, wanting to go home, Carl taken to hospital, his death, Carl lying to the boys so they would not give up?

13. Carl, his dog? Getting food for the boys, Ebbe seeing him? Later getting more food?

14. Beginning to talk with the boys, being affected by their presence, by seeing them as persons rather than as prisoners? Ludwig and the talk about the cross? Sharing stories? The soccer teams, the playing, the races along the beach?

15. The death of the dog, the boys and their reaction, Carl and his being upset, treating Ludwig as a dog, fetching the ball in his mouth, sitting, barking?

16. Carl and his reaction to the explosion, getting the boys to test the whole minefield, in file, arm in arm?

17. Ebbe and the officers, Ebbe, coming to the camp, taunting the boys, urinating?

18. The boys working on the load of spent mines, the vast explosion?

19. Four survivors, Carl and his pleading with Ebbe, Ebbe and his harsh reaction?

20. The new squad, no map, the beach of the mines – the four boys been called out, into the truck, Carl enabling them to escape?

21. Audience sympathy with the boys, and their presence in such difficult experiences defusing the mines? And the humanising of Carl?

OUR LITTLE SISTER

Japan, 2015, 128 minutes, Colour.
Directed by Hirokazu Koreeda.

Our Little Sister is a pleasing contemporary Japanese story, drawing on the many traditions of films about Japanese families, memories also of Chekhov and the three sisters.

The film introduces us to three adult sisters, the different personalities, the different jobs, their interactions. They have been alienated from their father who has married again and also has another daughter.

When they travel to the funeral, the encounter the new daughter, very polite, having a difficult time with her mother, and take a liking to her. They invite her to come to live with them, something with which she agrees.

While the film focuses on each of the older sisters, their work, their relationships, and their relationship with each other, it also focuses on the life of the young girl, in the new family, going to school, excelling at sport, leading a different life.

There are also discussions about the relationships, their father, her mother, and a return home for another funeral.

While some of the issues are harsh in themselves, the treatment of this film is quite genial and pleasingly emotional.

1. Contemporary Japanese story? The traditions of Japanese films about families? 21st-century version? Have three Sisters and the pattern, memories of Chekhov question the title? The focus on our and the sisters, the younger sister?

2. The film is a true women’s film, female sensibilities, characters, interactions, the sisters, their mother, their father’s response to her, his other wives? The focus on the system? They’re welcoming her? Their lives, work, bonds? Eliciting empathy from the male audience?

3. The situation, the father’s death, his leaving their mother, his other wife and her daughter, the new wife and children? His death? The talk about him, judging his behaviour? But that he could produce a good childlike Susan?

4. Introduction to the three sisters, the oldest, her bringing up the others, working hospital, her skills, the relationship with the doctor, they’re talking, his thinking getting a divorce, her being offered roles of leadership? The middle sister, and the bank, her relationships, her visits with her co-worker, the social situations and their offering help? The younger sister, young, rowdy, her boyfriend, involvement in the sports, the store? Their scenes together, at home, the bonds and their interaction?

5. Sousa, meeting the sisters, the courtesy and Bowers? The funeral, the crowds gathering, her antipathy towards her own mother? The conduct of the funeral? The discussion with older generation? The sisters taking her to see that you? Seeing them off at the train? The invitation for her to come acceptance?

6. Susan, her age, at school, the boys, friends, girls, the sports, her life as a teenager?

7. Settling at home, the welcomed them the sisters, her room, the meals, the discussions, the clothes…?

8. The death of the mother of three sisters, beating her husband, his long after the mother, her funeral?

9. The many themes of bonding, love and friendship, the walk on the beach – and their future?

MAX STEEL

US, 2016, 92 minutes, Colour.
Ben Winchell, Maria Bello, Andy Garcia, Ana Villafane, voice of: Josh Brenner.
Directed by Stewart Hendler.

Max Steel is a superhero story – mainly directed towards adolescent boys rather than an older audience or adolescent girls.

Is based originally on toys and then on cartoons on network television. Ben Winchell now takes on the role of Max, a teenager who discovers that he has all kinds of energy powers, bewildering to him – and to Sofia, the girl to whom he is attracted, to whom he has difficulty explaining the situation, but who, naturally, helps him in his enterprise to find out the truth and combat the villain.

What is distinctive is that there is a technological creature, an alien called Steel, who materialises, with a comic voice by Josh Brenner, who enables Max to energise his powers and direct the. Together they become Max Steel.

The film utilises a lot of the conventions of the superhero film, a vast plant where all kinds of scientific experiments take, place, some sinister characters on the plant, a mysterious storm and destruction, the introduction of themes of aliens, their powers on earth, and a mad scientist wanting these powers. Max’s father worked in the plant, admired by everyone, but mysteriously dying during an experiment.

Maria Bello plays Max’s mother, moving constantly around the United States which disturbs Max, never being able to settle, wondering about his father. They now return to live near the science plant and Max is introduced to the genially suave scientist, Miles Edwards, surprisingly played by Andy Garcia.

The film builds up to a climax, with deadlines for experiments, Steel urging Max on, the girlfriend as well, but his mother trying to protect him.

It doesn’t take great detective work or anticipation to work out who the villain is and his motivations against Max’s father. But he has no chance, Max’s mother disillusioned, Steel helping, the buildup to a superhero confrontation.

The film was not successful at the box office in the United States and released to DVD.

1. A superhero story for adolescent boys? A narrow target audience rather than older boys, girls, adults?

2. The plot parallels with the Superman story, aliens from planets, coming to earth, mysterious father, parents, the alien creature, the issue of energy, the hostile links, the villain? The heroics in costume?

3. The importance of special effects, the tornado and its destruction, the transformations, fights, Max flying and leaping, his armour? Steel, his identity issues, the comic touches of his voice and dialogue? Energy, the transformations, working with Max, and the discussions about his father, his mother? Separation, working together, his suspicion of Sofia? The buildup to the final battle with Miles?

4. Max, his relationship with his mother, his age, the number of moves, his room, the discovery of energy coming from his hands, his ability to stop it? The effects? Going to school, helping people, the boy dropping his books? On the bike, the crash and the encounter with Sofia? And is later doing the drawing of her, upside down? The discussions, at the diner, his always linking? Max in action, his identity, his father and his mother, the father and the motivations?

5. Miles Edwards, pleasant, at the dinner, his working with Max’s father, Max seeking out, the truth, the flashbacks and the truth, the betrayal, wanting power, energy, confronting Max, the fights, Steel helping him? Miles’ death?

6. Max and his adventures, with Steel, the humour, the seriousness? The storms, the threat of the links? Space, to conquer the humans? The attacks?

7. Max’s discovery that his mother knew all about the situations, with her husband, owning the large percentage of the company, getting the squad to find Max? Confronting Miles’s thugs?

8. Finding Max, the truth, and his explaining everything to Sofia? A future?

CRUSHED

Australia, 2015, 111 minutes, Colour.
Sarah Bishop, Les Hill, Roxane Wilson, Helmut Baitis, Aaron Glenane, Millie Spencer- Brown, Robert Preston, Jamie Irvine.
Directed by Megan Riakos.

Crushed is quite an ambiguous title for this film. The Vineyard settings, there is obviously a reference to the crushing of grapes. Then, a significant character is murdered, crushed against a wall. And then, the central character experiences a great deal of being crushed emotionally.

This is an Australian story, the story of Vineyards in north-western New South Wales in the Mudgee area. The film opens in Melbourne, focusing on Ellia, a young woman with business ambitions who has escaped from her family and the family business after a traumatising experience.

However, she receives the news that her father is dead and returns home for the funeral. What she discovers makes her involved in sorting out what actually happened, the alleged accidental death of her father turning into a murder. She is suspicious of her mother and of the foreman of the vineyard.

She is helped by her younger sister, trying to get over the memories of her dead brother. There is also a moody younger brother as well as a local policeman to whom she is attracted but who seems to be acting suspiciously and another worker at the vineyard. There is also a problem about chemicals being blown over neighbouring vineyards and one of the owners losing all his crops.

Enough ingredients to be intriguing – especially as audiences may not be anticipating who the murderer is.

The film keeps audience attention, well-written with its entry and interesting performances, including from Sarah Bishop as Ellia.

1. A murder mystery? A family saga? Vineyards and Wine production? Crops, fertilisers and poisons?

2. The opening, Melbourne, the city? The contrast with Mudgee, the wide open spaces, the Vineyards, the harvest, the process of picking the grapes, crushing them? The building and its engineering? The home? Police stations, hotels? Ordinary and authentic settings? The musical score?

3. The title, the variety of meanings, the father crushed to death, the crushing of the grapes, Ellia and her feeling crushed? Harriet and her crushing opposition?

4. Ellia, seen in Melbourne, sexual relationship, the call from her mother, her calling her father, wanting to set up the bar, her father’s financial support? The news of his death, flying to Mudgee, her reactions? The background of her alienation from the family, her twin brother, Adam, and their achievements? His death? The story about his death? The return, Harriet and her response, Zak and his response, the younger siblings? Their staying to work on the vineyard? David, foreman, the work, with the father, the relationship with the mother? Ivan, working, the sexual encounter with Ellia, his being blamed for construction? Lucas, the police, his mysterious new job – opening up suspicions? Jesse, with Mc Clintock, the talk, his death, Ellia finding the label? Mc Clintock, wanting to set fire to the vines? The story the dust storm, its overcoming his vineyard, his daughter with cancer? The police, the investigator, knowing everybody concerned? The cast list as suspects for the killings?

5. The story of the father, the vineyard in the family, his book for writing secrets? The news that he was crushed by the wall? The revelation that he was bashed? The arrest of his wife, suspicions, the difficulties of the relationship? The vineyard, the possibility for selling? The mother revealing that they were about to be divorced? Ellia alienated, the loss of her brother, but her father still supporting her?

6. The focus on her reactions, beginning to investigate, the interviews, the stances against her mother, the visits in prison? Suspicions of David, seeing him with her mother, the car, changing the tire, the approach with the wrench and her fear, he suggesting she phoned the police? Jesse, his ex-wife, family, with Mc Clintock, calming him down, working in the vineyard, wanting to talk with Ellia, her going to his house, shot, the label? Ellie going to the pub, flirting with Ivan, getting the money out of him, the relationship and her wanting quiet? Lucas, the relationship in the past, the sexual encounter, in the car, her fear, running into the fields, the chase? His being killed?

7. Ellia and Oscar, the younger brother, his moods, his relationship with his mother, worried that he had pushed his father? His facing Harriet, his having to make a decision? Against Harriet?

8. Ellia and Harriet, seeming love, support? Harriet driving her sister? Going to see her mother? The situation at the vineyard, Ellia and the documents, finding her signature? Ellia with the gun, bashing Ellia, tying her up, getting rid of Oscar from discovering Ellia, Ellia getting free, going to the fields, the chase, Zak with the gun, confronting Harriet, the truth, her motivations, resentment against their parents love of the twins, wanting the farm to prosper – and her slitting her throat?

9. Mc Clintock, the broader issues and family, the dust storm, genetic experimentations, poisons, the effect?

10. The final image of Ellia working hard with Zach, David and her mother?

11. A satisfying family drama with the Vineyard background and the mysterious murders and the solution?

THE BIRTH OF A NATION

US, 2016, 120 minutes, Colour.
Nate Parker, Armie Hammer, Penelope Ann Miller, Jackie Earle Haley, Mark Boone Jr, Anjanue Ellis, Dwight Henry, Roger Guenver Smith, Gabrielle Union.
Directed by Nate Parker.

It was in 1916 that pioneer film director, D. W. Griffith released his quite epic treatment of the American Civil War, The Birth of a Nation. Almost immediately, commentators raised difficulties because of the perceived stances of the and the director, some racist attitudes towards the African- Americans and a seeming glorifying of the Ku Klux Klan.

100 years later, African- American writer-director, Nate Parker, has made a film of the same name but taken very different stances.

The film is actually set in the pre-Civil War period, from 1809 into the 1820s and 30s. The settings are the usual plantation, the white family in the homestead, the black community living a rather impoverished existence, slaves, working in the cotton fields. This is well conveyed in the use of the locations.

The film also focuses on a young boy, seen as somewhat prophetic and special, celebrated in rituals – but, his father and other elders being persecuted pursued by slaves-dealers. As he grows up, he has a talent for reading, is a friend of the son of the plantation owner, the same age, invited into the household, nicely dressed, and taught to read by the plantation owner’s wife (Penelope Ann Miller). However, he is not invited to meals in the house and has to return home. When the owner dies, he is forced back to work in the fields.

Writer-director Nate Parker portrays Nat Turner as he grows up, talented in reading and leading the slaves, knowledgeable of the Bible, able to conduct religious services, yet still working in the fields. The new plantation owner is his boyhood friend, Sam, played by Armie Hammer. There is still the difference between black and white although Sam seems to be much more open than others.

At one stage, Nat accompanies Sam to the town and views the slave market, a young woman being savagely oppressed, Sam buying the slave, taking her home, her turning on Nate but then finding him sympathetic – and, ultimately, they marry.

In difficult financial times, some religious leaders have the idea that Nate should go round the black communities and preach, but highlight the emphasis on obeying masters as a key Biblical concept. He does, but finds it oppressive even as he carries out the orders. When his wife is molested by a white dinner guest, it is the last straw.

The latter part of the film is about the black uprising, Nate able to gather so many of the slaves around him, the attack on the white settlement, the intervention of the military – leading to a hanging.

Mark Boone Jr is the religious minister who encourages Nat’s preaching. Jackie Earle Haley is the embodiment of all that is evil, oppressive, molesting, about white slavers.

This sympathetic emphasis on the black uprising as one of the prologues to the Civil War is distinctive for 2016 but is stances and attitudes are the opposite of the classic pioneering film of 1916.

1. The title? Using D. W. Griffith’s title of 1916? But the opposite perspective? The portrait of the black uprising? Before the Civil War?

2. Re-creation of the period, 1809 to 1830s? The plantation, the mansion, the interiors, the cotton fields, the accommodation for the Blacks? The gatherings and preaching? The uprising? Costumes, decor? The musical score?

3. The prologue: Nat Turner as a little boy, going to the ceremony, the rituals, his being special, his being designated as a prophet? The recurring of these images throughout the film?

4. Nat as a boy, his bond with his mother? Going into the forest, his father looking for him, the slaves in their search? The attack, shots, death? His fleeing? The boy at home, his mother, grandmother? The chief slave and oppression and threats? His friendship with Sam, but their going to different meals? Taking the book, reading, Sam’s wife and her admiration, deciding to teach Nat to read, dressing in good clothes, taking him into the house? The possibilities for him?

5. Matt having to go back into the cotton fields? Growing up? Sam, the owner of the plantation? His friendship with Nat and yet…? The poverty of the black community, Nat becoming a pastor, reading the Scriptures, preaching, the ideas, reciting grace at meals? Sam, the financial desperation, the invitation to Nat to preach on various plantations? Sam accompanying him? The dinner, the hopes for prosperity? The guest and the touching of the women? Sam angry? Nat and the whipping, the savagery of the lash? Nat standing up, Sam letting him go, his collapse?

6. Nat and his personality, age and experience, work in the fields, his preaching, his knowledge of Scripture? His being used – urging slaves to obey their masters, even when they were unjust? Preaching obedience? His grace, quoting the Psalms – but the beginnings of rebellion and enthusing the oppressed Blacks?

7. Sam and Nat, going to the slave market, the humiliations of the slaves, purchasing Cherry, her ferocity and turning on Nat? Nat’s mother and helping her to calm Cherry? Cherry working in the household? Nat courting her, the wedding, the grandmother presiding? Her pregnancy, giving birth?

8. The possibilities for the Blacks, the slaves and the insistence on permits, confronting Cherry, the rape? Nat writing to her? The behaviour at the dinner, touching and sexual possession?

9. Nat, rebellion, the effect of the whipping, the slaves observing? The consequences of the whipping, the Scriptures, staring at the people, Nat asking for volunteers, the joining? The caution of Sam’s majordomo and the fear that all would be killed?

10. The savagery of the uprising, 48 hours, killing Sam, his struggle for life, death? The grief of his mother? The rampage, the violence and revenge, the bloodlust?

11. Encountering the slaves, the gathering the whites together, the attack, the pitched battle and brawl? The confrontation by the soldiers? Nat and his visit to Cherry, trying to reassure he? yet the number of hanged men and women, the trees, the camera moving through like a gallery?

12. Nat, his arrest, the trial, his looking to heaven, the savagery of the whites, their calling for Nat’s death? His look to heaven, the Angel, the hood on his head, lifted high, his death?

13. The significance of the historical note at the end, the uprising and its being put down?

LOVING

US, 2016, 123 minutes, Colour.
Joel Edgerton, Ruth Negga, Marton Csokas, Alano Miller, Bill Camp, Nick Kroll, David Jensen, Jon Bass, Michael Shannon, Matt Molloy.
Directed by Jeff Nichols.

Loving sounds like a pleasantly innocuous, obvious kind of title. However, there is much more to it. The central couple of this film are certainly a loving couple but that is also their name. And, their name went into American Constitutional history in a significant case concerning the state of Virginia and issues of miscegenation, rights and inter-racial marriage.

Loving takes its place with a number of African- American films which received acclaim, award nominations for 2016: Fences, Hidden Figures, Moonlight.

The film opens in the backwaters of Virginia in 1958, Richard Loving, a white bricklayer, is in a relationship with Mildred, an African- American woman, in a rather tight-knit community. Mildred announces she is pregnant, Richard wanting to build a house for them and buying a lot, then deciding to drive to Washington DC to marry because this is forbidden in Virginia. They put their marriage certificate on the wall but, in a night raid, the local sheriff descends on the house, arrests them and puts them in jail.

A friendly lawyer is able to help them with his friend, the judge, but it means pleading guilty and accepting that they must leave the state of Virginia for 25 years. They sadly accept this but, when it is time for the birth of the child, Mildred want Richard’s mother to be the midwife and they return.

This is the time of the major stirrings of the Civil Rights Movement, and the Loving family (three children by now, the boys very energetic, continually running around) are living in DC, see glimpses of the March on Washington on television. But Mildred is encouraged to write to Robert Kennedy and does so.

Over the following years, at a slow pace, civil rights movements become interested in the Loving Case and challenge the past decisions with the Virginia judge, his rejecting the plea, young lawyers taking the case to the state of Virginia, losing again – and deciding, ultimately, to take the case to the Supreme Court.

Of themselves, Richard and Mildred Loving might be called simple folk. This is especially true of Richard, rather laconic, talented in fixing motors and participating in drag racing, constant in his bricklaying work, feeling hard done by the law, rather reluctant to move into the race-legal issues, wary of the media, but a devoted father and completely loving his wife. He is played particularly well by Joel Edgerton. Mildred is more knowledgeable than her husband, becomes interested in the issues though always deferring to Richard. She finds suburban DC oppressive, especially for raising the children and wants to return to live in Virginia. Ruth Negga received an Oscar nomination for this performance.

The film was written and directed by Jeff Nichols who has made a number of very interesting films in recent years including Take Shelter, Mud, Midnight Special, all focusing on families and relationships and crises. Michael Shannon is a regular in his films and it is pleasing to see his brief, rather humorous cameo as a photographer for Life Magazine.

This is an important piece of Americana, a challenge to a state and victory in the Supreme Court, a challenge to legislation based on false interpretations of separations of race from the Bible, the heritage from the slave era.

1. The title and the various meanings?

2. The true story, the 1950s and the 1960s?
3. United States and racism? African- Americans? In Virginia, in Washington DC? Applications of the law, the role of the police, police treatment? The case and its going through the courts, local, state, Supreme?
4. The period, costumes and decor, the atmosphere of Virginia in the 1950s, the countryside, the farm, the house? The details of ordinary life? The musical score? The contrast with Washington DC, the suburbs, the streets, the homes?

5. The strong cast, nominations for awards?

6. The introduction to Richard and to Mildred? Their backgrounds, white and black, their families, the parents? The characters, lifestyle, living in the communities, Richard and his work and building? The background of the drag races?

7. Richard and Mildred, simple people, their life, the relationship, Mildred pregnant, telling Richard? Richard and his getting the property, planning the house, the design? His presence at the drag races, the members of the family, friends, celebrating afterwards, expertise? The decision to marry?

8. The car trip to DC, the simple wedding, Mildred’s father as witness, the certificate, placing it on the wall? At home, in bed, the police arriving during the night, the attitude of the sheriff, hustling them both to the cells? Richard bailed out, Mildred staying? The sheriff and his interview with Richard, the mixture of harshness and understanding?

9. Mildred’s family, the support, the sister upset with Richard? Richard’s mother, home, her role as a midwife? Her later saying that Richard should not have married Mildred?

10. Getting the advice of the lawyer, the discussions, going to the judge, the guilty plea, being suspended, having to leave Virginia for 25 years?

11. Richard, his reactions, out of his depth in most matters, simple and straightforward, laconic, work, devotion to Mildred, the children? Leaving, driving, the DC suburbs? The kind woman taking them in?

12. The issue of the birth, driving home, concealing Mildred? The experience of birth, joy? The police arriving, going to the court, the plea about the birth, the lawyer coming, apologising that it was his fault – but sternly warning them not to come back?

13. The years passing, the children, their energy and running around, two boys and a girl, the visits from Mildred’s family? Richard continuing his work in building, bricklaying?

14. 1958 to 1965, the era of Civil Rights, the family living in DC but not participating, seeing the news on the television of the March on Washington? Mildred finding it hard, the children with limited place to play, baseball, the building sites, the boy hit by the car, Mildred and her decision to go, packing?

15. Mildred writing to Robert Kennedy?

16. Cohan, his call, Richard unwilling, the visit to the office, Cohan young and inexperienced, his desk? His suggestion that they go back to be arrested…?

17. The discussions with the professor, Cohan meeting Hirskop, the discussions about the law, the Constitution, the possibility of change? Their eagerness to take up the case?

18. The time taken for the case, the years passing, the planning strategies, Richard laconic, the case going back before the local judge and losing?

19. The law, Constitution, the case against Virginia, miscegenation, interracial marriage, the heritage from the slave era, rights to marry, the false drawing on arguments from the Bible and separate races, no mixing, no mixing of species? The state of Virginia winning?

20. The brother hurrying along the road, Richard and his alertness, getting the gun?

21. Life magazine, the photographer, a pleasant visit, cheerful story, the photos, especially of the couple on the couch watching television? The brick in Richard’s car surrounded by Life Magazine? The later presentation of the actual photo during the final credits?

22. Life as normal, the episodes of the drag race, the discussion with friends – and the comment that Richard should not have married Mildred?

23. The media, the filming at home, Richard and his being wary? Mildred giving the interview?

24. The Supreme Court, Richard not wanting to go, at home during the hearings? The presentation of both lawyers, their respectful presentation to the judges?

25. The phone call, the good news, the media arriving, Richard and Mildred quiet?

26. The film’s comments about human rights, dignity of persons, right to marriage, the importance of family – and the final visuals of the Loving family together?

27. The final credits, Richard and the drunk driver death? Mildred and her interview, her death in 2008?

THE TRUST

US, 2016, 92 minutes, Colour.
Nicholas Cage, Elijah Wood, Sky Ferreira, Ethan Suplee, Jerry Lewis.
Directed by Alex Brewer, Benjamin Brewer.

The Trust is one of the numerous films that Nicholas Cage has been making for some years, generally thrillers, often action shows. A number of reviewers have liked the film, but…

The setting is Las Vegas, two policeman who are supposed to be buddies working in the evidence room. The partner is played by Elijah Wood. We see them working together, the issues of evidence, those in charge of the holding spaces, the police chiefs. There is a momentary bonus when, of all people, Jerry Lewis, at age 89, makes an appearance as Cage’s father.

The trouble is that Cage discovers a huge secret vault, is suspicious of drug raids, and decides that he and his friend should find the means to get into the vault (including going to various stores, testing out equipment, almost getting through, equipment breaking, the finding of a hostage girl, an old man looking after the area…)

It is surprising to find Cage turning so quickly from good cop too bad cop and the pressure that he puts on his buddy who is very ambiguous and indecisive throughout the whole exploit. There is a subplot involving the young woman and her ambiguous attitude.

Elijah Wood becomes very cautious, especially when a huge amount of ammunition, money, drugs are all found in the vault. There are suspicions about drug lords in Las Vegas. Cage becomes manic, has grandiose plans what to do with the proceeds, intimidate his partner – who is eventually killed.

On paper, the solution may make sense but for Cage to turn on Wood and for Wood to die…?

The title is obviously very ironic.

DISCARDED LOVERS

US, 1932, 60 minutes, Black and white.
Natalie Morehead, Russell Hopton, J.Farrell Mac Donald, Barbara Weeks, Jason Robards Sr, Roy D' Arcy, Sharon Lynn, Jack Trent, Allen Dailey.
Directed by Fred C. Newmeyer.

Discarded Lovers is a non-essential curiosity item of small-budget American filmmaking in the early 1930s, supporting feature material.

The film was of interest in its first few minutes as the camera fluidly runs around a film studio set, a range of locations, personnel, technical aspects, actors and director as well is visitors.

The film shows several takes of the key scene in the film which is later used as a way to understanding a murder.

The star is one of those haughty women who rose from nothing to be a star, has divorced one husband thinking him beneath her, is in the process of divorce from her present husband, a jealous drinking man, and is the object of attention from the director, the writer and the chauffeur who has stolen a ring from her. While there are police in the investigation, especially one who is too stupid for words!, it is a writer who has solved other mysteries who sets up one of those inevitable gatherings of all the suspects in order to reveal the killer. He is also attracted to the dead woman’s secretary who turns out to be the sister of the drinking husband, who had hoped that her working with the star would bring her around.

This is material that was to become much more familiar as the 1930s wore on. (And it is the writer who is the murderer, creating scenes in films which reveal his feelings and his plans.)

DEATHGASM

New Zealand, 2015, 86 minutes, Colour.
Milo Cawthorne, James Blake, Kimberly Crossman, Sam Berkely, Daniel Creswell.
Directed by Jason Lei Howden.

This is a New Zealand entry, with government money backing, into the small-budget blood and gore horror stakes. It is designed especially for the kind of characters who appear in the story, their age, sensitivities and sensibilities, love of heavy metal music and curiosity about horror. It is the kind of film that plays in specialised horror festivals.

Those interested in the impact of the film, checking with the Internet Movie Database reveals how much the fans enjoyed the show.

The director has had a career in New Zealand with special visual effects for a great range of films, especially several Hollywood blockbusters (The Avengers, Prometheus, Wolverine, the Hobbit films), and draws on this expertise in creating all kinds of horror atmospheres, bloodied creatures, gory interludes.

This film is not something new for New Zealand – the director has worked with Peter Jackson and their references to his earliest horror films like Brain Dead.

The film is set in a small New Zealand town, Greypoint (and there is a Greymouth on the South Island), and a nerdish teenager who has had difficulties with his parents is taken in by his uncle and aunt and aggressive cousin. The cousin is a bit of a hero at the local school and the archetypal blonde is his girlfriend. Brodie, the nerdish young man, helps another student who is being bullied and joins up with him and his friend to form a band at. A chance meeting at a record shop introduces him to Zakk also becomes part of the band.

There is something of a subplot about mysterious pages of music which are being held by an older musician and a visit, Brodie and Zakk taking the record and music – but he is killed by a very well-dressed assassin on behalf of a man who claims to have diabolical power and who then executes the assassin. He will appear later on confronting the supernatural powers which appear claiming to be the one to receive these powers – only for his being stabbed by his female underling.

In playing the music, all kinds of dire and drastic things occur in the town, people being transformed into zombielike creatures, a great deal of blood, a great deal of spewing of blood, confrontations and brutal deaths.

In the meantime, Brodie is attracted towards the blonde student, she to him but he is betrayed by a bored Zakk which turns Brodie against his friend – who is much more involved in the supernatural happenings than was expected.

Young audiences who relish a lot of tongue-in-cheek horror where the film makers don’t want to exercise much control, indulging their imaginations and their emotions, will probably like this one a lot.

THE DINNER

US, 2017, 120 minutes, Colour.
Richard Gere, Laura Linney, Steve Coogan, Rebecca Hall, Chloe Sevigny, Charlie Plummer,Adepero Oduye, Michael Chernus.
Directed by Oren Moverman.

The Dinner is one of those American meals where relatives and friends gather, an initial pleasant atmosphere, but then truths are told and there are savage interactions.

Oren Moverman (writer of such films as Jesus’ Son and director of Ramparts, The Messenger, Time out of Mind) has adapted a novel by Howard Koch, which had already received two film versions, one Dutch and one Italian. The story has been strongly adapted to the United States, society, politics.

Audiences who may be looking forward to the details of the dinner, there is quite a lot of detail (the restaurant is rather exclusive and so the portions are quite small!) And they are presented with verbal fanfare by the maitre d’ (Michael Chernus), fascinatingly elitist, with a very well-dressed and uniformed staff who serve all the courses, exceedingly well-drilled.

Much of the film is seen from the point of view of Paul, the younger brother of an ambitious politician, Stan. Paul is played by Steve Coogan, one of his best performances, manically comic and deadly serious, a man who is emotionally disturbed, is prone to rant and rave, is preoccupied with American history, the Civil War, Gettysburg, has a low opinion of the human race and is not hesitant to voice his denunciations. He is also very sulky and walks out at various moments of the dinner. It is a tour de force performance by Steve Coogan.

Richard Gere is the politician, very smooth in his manner, able to work the room with great charm, the word here, handshakes for everyone… He is accompanied to the dinner by his personal assistant and has to go to the phone many times, preoccupied about legislation he is moving and whether it has support or not. Richard Gere is very much at home in this kind of role.

Then there are the wives. Laura Linney portrays Paul’s wife, Claire, the seemingly agreeable woman, mother of their son, but prone to nerviness and some illness in the past. On the other hand, Rebecca Hall plays Katelyn, Stan’s wife, formerly his assistant, a woman also on some edge. Katelyn is not Stan’s first wife. There are flashbacks to sequences with his first wife, Barbara (Chloe Sevigny and the distance between the couple and her decision to go to India.

So, this is the setting. But the audience is privy to the behaviour of the sons of each couple. They are spoiled, affluent teenagers, uncaring in their attitudes, reckless in their behaviour, caught up in a very violent situation of their own creation, a lonely black woman who lives on the streets their victim.

While the audience has to assess this behaviour, which was videoed and one of the cousins is blackmailing the other for cash down, it is not difficult to be condemnatory of the young men.

Where the drama lies as the dinner continues is in the stances taken by each of the adults, the women surprisingly wanting to defend the bad behaviour of their sons, arguing away some of the guilt. Some of the dialogue provides quite a shock to hear the women whom we had initially come to like being very hard in their wanting to defend, even excuse, look down on the victim. Paul has been kept out of the picture and so, discovering some of what has been going on without his knowledge, erupts. And, surprisingly, it is the politician who has the greater sense of justice and some compassion for the victim rather than excusing the young men.

This is the kind of film that can be called an indictment of contemporary affluent American society, white society, a blend of arrogance and complacency.

1. A psychodrama? Political drama? Justice drama?

2. The title, the focus, the preparation, arrival, selection of the table, the captions indicating the stages of the meal, the progress of the meal, the descriptions, moving in and out? The insertion of the flashbacks? Leaving? The musical score?

3. Homes, roads, the ATM, the restaurant, its interiors?

4. The focus on food, style, the up-market restaurant, the description of the food and presentation of every course?

5. Introduction to Paul? The portrait of Paul, the presence of Steve Coogan, his age, American accent, Claire, Michael, the introduction and his voice-over, raving, the emphasis on history, wars, his perspective, the touch of madness, issues of deaths? Preoccupation with Gettysburg? Not wanting to go to the dinner, Claire and her preparation, taking Michael’s phone? His going, his antagonism towards Stan? Behaviour at the meal, talking, the interruptions, his bitterness, calling people apes, his treatment of the staff? Attacks on Stan, memories of Barbara, the adoption of Beau, Claire condemning his outbursts about Beau, racism? His memories of Michael (after the audience had seen Michael in childhood as well as his taunting and aggression)? The issue of the baseball, the breaking of the window, Paul and his harsh dealing with the owner? The house, Claire in hospital, the mess, Barbara and Stan visiting, his punching Stan and Michael seeing it? Claire and her illness, memories of her pregnancy and the difficulties? Paul remembering his lessons, the bored kids at school, his comments on history, yelling at the class, their laughing at him as he left, the long talk to the empty classroom? His continued topics? At the meal, moving away, not wanting to eat, condemnation of the prices, the social justice comment about the wealth? Reconciling with Heintz? Seeing Michael, the discovery about the plan, others avoiding him, Katelyn, insulting her, listening to Stan’s explanation of the situation and the challenge, Claire’s control, her urging him to deal with Beau, chasing him, about to hit him, Stan and his kicking him? His declaration to save the family, war and a fight, whatever the cost?

6. Michael, with his cousins, the party and the music, out, drinking, Beau vomiting, the ATM episode, the abuse of the old woman, verbal, the matches, setting the woman on fire, the glee, filming it? Rick and his collaboration? Beau and his wanting money, changing? Michael as a character? His relationship with his parents, condemning his father, his girlfriend – and her smoking, with the car?

7. Claire, getting ready to go, happy, arrival, their being mistaken for Stan and Katelyn? Her relationship with Stan, with Katelyn? Controlling and cajoling Paul? The meal, the revelation of the deal with Michael and the payment to Beau, her past, the difficulty of birth, not wanting another child, listening to Katelyn, consoling her, the worry about the situation, the revelation of her true self, her outbursts against the woman and seeing her as a vicious beast, protecting her son, her reacting to Stan and his press conference, urging Paul to deal with Beau?

8. Stan, the politician, travelling in his van, his entourage, Nina and her advice, devotion? The past with Barbara, the kids, adopting Beau, her leaving, going to India, her visit with Stan, response to Paul and wanting to take Michael in for the duration? Stan’s concern about mental care, the continual phoning and checking the numbers? Running for governor? Katelyn and her frustration? The dinner for a talk, Paul’s negative reactions, Claire’s response? Heinz and the presentation of the meal? Stan and his ability to do a room and shake everyone’s hand? The stages of the meal, Paul’s outbursts, the insertion of the flashbacks, the visit to Gettysburg, the diorama, their talk, Paul blaming Stan about their mother’s love for him, Stan and his version, the mother mad, he had to be the adult, the madness in the family, his inheritance, Paul getting the house? His success with the vote? Wanting to tell the truth, his dilemma, Nina helping his decision, his arguments with Katelyn and Claire, issues of family, the son and his responsibility, going to jail, owning up, living with it? His expressions of compassion for the woman? Feelings of Justice?

9. Katelyn, her insistence, their arguments? Stan and his compromise about the press conference, waiting three days? Katelyn and her relief, Claire and her relief?

10. Arriving home, Beau and his fear, Stan and his kicking, the fight?

11. No ending given – the fact that the audience saw what Michael did rather than just the video, the moral judgements about his behaviour, abhorrence with it, justice to be done, the suffering of the woman? And the insistence of these middle Americans that family is first.