T2 TRAINSPOTTING

UK, 2017, 117 minutes, Colour.
Ewan Mc Gregor, Ewen Bremner, Johnny Lee Miller, Robert Carlyle, James Cosmo, Shirley Henderson,
Directed by Danny Boyle.

Trainspotting became a classic of the 1990s, based on a novel by Irvine Welsh, it was setting Edinburgh but in the sub culture of drugs in the city, focusing on four men in their 20s, their exuberantly reckless life, the impact of drugs – and a certain move toward self-destruction.

But, here they are again, 20 years later. Have they changed at all? Have they learned from their experiences? And what have they been doing during the previous 20 years? This is a story of four men in their mid-40s, also Edinburgh, and there is still something of a drug-culture.

For those who appreciated the first film, there is no doubt that this film will be more than interesting. One very serious reviewer remarked that all the “magic� from the original film had gone. “Magic� is not exactly the word that comes to mind when considering Trainspotting. There is a lot of sentiment, of the affectionate and affable type as well is the hostile and aggressive type, but there is also a great deal of reminiscing with one character remarking that they were “tourists in their own nostalgia�, something which many of the audience will be indulging in as well.

And what has happened? Ewan Mc Gregor is Mark Renton returns to Edinburgh after 15 years in Amsterdam, a finance course, a job, a wife – but this all now collapsing. Johnny Lee Miller Simon is involved in blackmailing clients of a prostitute that he is set up with a camera and has inherited a derelict pub. Ewen Bremner’s spud, quite an interesting character in this film, has been on drugs, tried rehabilitation, been on several jobs but, there is an enjoyable collage showing how he turns up an hour late for everything and is now on his own, yearning for his wife and son. And Robert Carlyle’s Begbie? In prison all these years, but now with a brainwave to get a fellow prisoner to stab him so that he has to go to hospital and where he can walk out, trying to resume his life, meetings wife and son, the son intended to go to college but his father forcing him to go on a botched burglary expedition.

So, there we are. What will they do now?

Mike finds he doesn’t want to go back to Amsterdam, is reunited with his father, experiences the animosity of Simon but then decides to stay and help on a project where Simon can turn his pub into a sauna (that is, brothel). He is in a relationship with the prostitute he set up, Veronica, who is from Bulgaria and a shrewd operator as well. Spud helps with the renovation of the pub meanwhile writing down his stories which Veronica is fascinated with. And Begbie, he is after some revenge on Mark.

All this happens, more or less, but Simon does get charged for his blackmail, but not before going to members of a fund to appeal for a grant and then going to a club where he and Mark Steele all the credit cards and, in a high point in the film, because all the crowd is loyalist and hasn’t forgotten the Battle of the Boyne, are forced to sing the song, Mark improvising, the song being 1690, and the end of each chorus is “not a Catholic left� which is an amazing hit with everybody vigourosly joining in.

There is a buildup to a climax with Begbie attacking Mark, defended by Simon, and Begbie delivered in the boot of the car to the prison gates. And Veronica, with the help of spud, is no mean exploiter herself, especially with the financial grant money.

Trainspotting fans may well be invigorated by this sequel – but it does present a kind of sub- culture world, some dead ends in life unless one is in exploiter. but spud is a great success with his stories, going to see his wife and son and she suggesting a title for them!

1. The original as a cult film? Of the 90s? The cast, Edinburgh, the situations, the drug culture, the end of the 20th century? The director?

2. 20 years, all going back on memories, “tourists in their own nostalgia�, changes on not, experience and learning – or continuing, exploitation? The world of Irviine Welsh, the drug world – and the writer doing a cameo himself?

3. The title, Mark’s wallpaper, the trains? The change from Trainspotting of the 1990s?

4. The city of Edinburgh, the streets in the city centre, Arthur’s seat the views, the railway stations, the poorer areas, the pub? Prison? The musical score?

5. The introduction to Mark, his return, living in Amsterdam, wife, lying about having children, his accountancy course and job, companies merging and his losing his job and resigning? The money from 1996 for each? Going home, the welcome from his father? Going to see Spud, their friendship? Going to see Simon, the visit to the pub, the conversation, the fight, Simon’s viciousness, the issue of the £4000? Mark going, deciding to stay? Veronica, Simon and the blackmail scheme, the plan for the brothel, the attraction to Veronica, his deciding to stay, the building of the brothel, Begbie getting out, pursuing Mark, the extensive fight, Mark winning, Begbie in the boot of the car outside the prison? The highlight of Simon and Mark raising the money, going to the board for the grant and spending their story about…? Stealing the credit cards the club – and improvising the 1690 song, the Battle of the Boyne and everybody joining in – “no Catholics left�?

6. Spud, years of drugs, many jobs, his being fired, the collage of his being one hour late for everything? The money from Mark, drugs? Seeing Gail, wanting to see his son? Back on the drugs, the dealers on the steps? Going to group – and 11 more steps? Helping with the building of the brothel? Friendship with Veronica, telling the stories, her urging him to write them down, her reading them? Begbie in the stories, his liking them? Ironically, the money plan, Spud has expert in forgeries, the grant money going to Veronica in Bulgaria? Visiting Gail, his son – Gail and the stories and suggesting a title?

7. Simon, the same after 20 years, his blackmailing scheme, the teacher and the threats, the money, his having to intervene with the client being too rough? His being left the pub, very few customers? Mark arriving, Simon’s bitterness, the fight – and the lone drinker continuing drinking? The conflict about the £4000, handing it over, paying debts? The plan for the brothel, the drawings, Mark and not going to Amsterdam, telling the truth, staying, helping with the plane, the appeal for the loan, the robberies in the club, singing 1690? Simon’s arrest, going to see the lawyer friend, expensive? Begbie, arriving, the fight with Mark and Simon saving him? Ironic – the relationship and her leaving?

8. Begbie, in prison, getting this prisoner to spike him, in hospital, escaping, going to see his wife and son, the son wanting to go to college, the burglary with his son, going awry? Plans, his son standing up to him? Simon, Spud and the stories and liking them? Wanting revenge on Mark, the fight, losing, in the boot of the car outside the prison?

9. Past characters: Gail and her son, the lawyer, begged his wife and son, Mark and dad?

10. Veronica, her character, from Bulgaria, in Scotland, her work, shrewd, getting the money – and the percentage for spud?

11. An Edinburgh a slice of life, 21st-century?

THE PARTY

UK, 2017, 77 minutes, Black and white.
Kristin Scott Thomas, Timothy Spall, Patricia Clarkson, Bruno Ganz, Cherry Jones, Emily Mortimer, Cillian Murphy.
Directed by Sally Potter.

Over the decades Sally Potter has made quite a number of interesting, often offbeat films, remembering Orlando, The Man who Cried, Rage, and Ginger and Rosa.

In this film, photographed in very effective and sharp black-and-white, she also shows how much material can be condensed into 77 minutes of running time.

It is something like this: Sally Potter has called on several top actors, three British, two Americans, an Irishman and a German, written them some very sharp and telling dialogue, directed them to interact with each other, mounting tension as the film goes on, many in the audience remembering the effect of this kind of social drama in the confines of a meal as in Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf.

The film opens with Janet, Kristin Scott Thomas, opening the front door and raising a revolver. We have to wait only about 75 minutes to know what this is all about – and be surprised. Kristin Scott Thomas portrays a politician who has just been announced as an opposition minister, for health, having campaigned long and hard and put her socialist principles into practice. This is the other meaning of the Party, the political party. Then we see Bill, her husband, sitting depressed and forlorn, rather haggard and not with it, listening to music, waiting for the guests for a celebratory meal. He is played by Timothy Spall.

The first visitors to arrive are April and Gottfried, Patricia Clarkson and Bruno Ganz, an unlikely couple, she very sardonic, even cynical, American, close friend of Janet, full of opinions and certainly in no way hesitant to express them, some offhand, some calculated – and often the calculation is to upset and hurt. On the other hand, Gottfried is a genial German who admires April immensely even though she expresses the desire to separate from him and keeps putting him down in front of everyone. He is a personal coach, anti-Western medicine, interested in breathing, self-help, self-healing, and considering doctors’ diagnoses the equivalent of voodoo or curses.

The next couple to arrive and Martha and her partner Jinny, Cherry Jones and Emily Mortimer. Martha is an intellectual, university professor, trendy in many ways, common-sensed. Jinny is much younger and is about to announce that she is not only pregnant but is expecting twins, more than a shock for Martha.

Another couple is expected, husband, Tom, Cillian Murphy, and Maryann who does not arrive. He easily breaks out in a sweat despite his very dapper suit, and relies on cocaine fixes in an attempt to calm his anxiety. He has also brought a gun but decides to throw it into a garbage bin.

This review, having introduced the characters, will leave the rest for the audience to experience, be surprised at, sometimes laugh, sometimes be dismayed, wonder about human nature and its follies and foibles.

Each of the characters has a story. Many of the stories are intertwined and cause quite some surprise and anxiety, outbursts of affection, outbursts of violence, and the problem whether Janet will continue in her role as the new minister.

In fact, a well-written, well-directed, well-acted, contemporary issues drama.

1. The convention of the social event, preparation, guests, situations, revelations, antagonisms, upsets, emotional twists?

2. The black-and-white photography and its sharpness? The editing and the focus on the rooms, kitchen, bathroom, back courtyard? The focus on particular characters, their faces, the responses?

3. The musical score, Jerusalem during the opening credits, Bill and his playing the range of records and the records when he was unconscious?

4. The prologue, Janet coming to the door, the gun? The resumption at the end, Tom and his gun, Janet finding it, April urging her to be violent, including murder? The revelation of the final betrayal?

5. The focus on Bill, looking terrible, listening to the music, sitting in the chair? People greeting him? Janet acknowledging his support? Martha and the memories of their friendship? His revelation that he was terminally ill? The effect on him? The variety of responses, cerebral arguments? Gottfried and his theories, therapies, feelings, despising of Western medicine, admitting surgery could help? Bill and the revelation about his relationship with Marianne? Tom urging him to the truth? Janet and her shock, hitting her husband? Tom punching him out, their thinking he was dead? Bill wanting to live, but with Marianne? His having felt neglected by Janet?

6. The focus on Janet, the announcement of her elevation to opposition ministry, for health? Her personality, calm, the congratulatory phone calls, the sly secret phone calls and texts? Her cooking, linking compared to Mrs Thatcher? Greeting the guests, her relationship with each of them? April on the long friendship, support? Her reaction to the different information and news? Bill and his terminal illness and her shock, not knowing? Her wanting to resign, staying to look after him? His saying that he wanted to spend the rest of his life with Marianne, Janet’s anger, punching him, chewing her wrist? Trying to cope, the burnt canapés, in the rubbish, discovering the gun, taking it, going to the bathroom, April cajoling her? The final message – and the relationship with Marianne? Yet her estimation of herself, her commitment to government, processes, her campaigning?

7. April, cynical and sardonic, her aphorisms, the continued criticisms of Gottfried and his sayings, her control of situations, theoretical suggestions? Her reaction to Bill’s illness? To the news about Martha and Jinny and the triplets? Interactions with Tom? The discussions with Janet, in the kitchen, after the news, in the bathroom, her encouraging Janet?

8. Gottfried, German, admiring April, her condemning him and saying she was separating, comparing the others with his reactions? Sitting on the floor, on the sofa, his comments about life, his comment about health, alternative methods, Eastern methods, condemning Western medicine, curses and voodoo, condemning doctors and diagnoses? Indicating the people could heal themselves? Or that surgery could be helpful? Interactions with Tom, Bill’s collapse, trying to revive him? The irony of Janet being able to hit Bill’s chest and bring him to consciousness?

9. Martha, professor, theories, cerebral? Her relationship with Jinny, not going to the tests, the news about the triplets? Her being afraid? Her reaction to Bill’s illness, to the revelation about Marianne, of making her flat available for them to meet? Jinny, younger, in love with Martha, the marriage ceremony and the vows, triplets, her being sick, helping in the kitchen with the burnt canapés, suspicious of Tom, especially about the garbage and the gun? Her shock at hearing the relationship between Martha and Bill, her disgust? Wanting to move away, Martha and her explanations and pleas?

10. Tom, hyperactive, financier, the expensive suit, nervous arrival, sweating, the cocaine, in the bathroom, the gun and his putting it in the garbage? Helping Jinny with the burning food?
The anxiety, love for his wife, forcing Bill to tell the truth? His punching Bill? Trying to revive him?

11. The status of each of the characters at the end, April and Gottfried perhaps staying together, Martha and Jinny together, especially for the triplets? Bill and his illness, wanting to be with Marianne? Tom in a state of despair? Janet and her anger – and the gun?

12. The effect of this kind of ensemble work, social events and truth telling seriously and in games?

BRIGHT NIGHTS/ HELLER NACHTS

Germany/ Norway, 2017, 86 minutes, Colour.
Georg Friedrich, Tristan Gobel.
Directed by Thomas Arslan.

Bright Nights was entered into the competition of the 2017 Burma now they. Which is rather a surprise because it is a perfectly ordinary (well perhaps not perfectly) story of a father-son relationship.

The setting is northern Norway. If it has been your dream to travel through the mountains in the north of Norway (not the fjords) than if you see this film you will have fulfilled your dream and not had to travel at all. There is beautiful location scenery, the mountains, the lakes, the flora and the fauna. While the director obviously enjoys filming the scenery, it is something of a dramatic mystery as to why there is a long (Rather, very long) sequence where the camera is set on the dashboard, looking out clearly through the frame of the windscreen camera getting the audience to share the view of the drive upwards on a gravel road gradually moving into fault. Well, it does give the audience an opportunity to ponder on what they have been looking at in terms of the Father and the son as well as this trip into the mountains.

George Friedrich is Michael, a builder and supervisor who is informed of the death of his father, whom he hasn’t seen for five years, a hard man, who has spent his retirement in a village in Norway. The father’s daughter is unforgiving and will not go to the funeral and Michael, having been somewhat upset by his partners news that she has been given a Washington job for a year as her papers corresponded, decides to take his alienate it son with him. The sun doesn’t really want to go but is interested to see the place where his grandfather lived.

The go to the funeral, the only mourners there, along with the priest and the gravedigger.

After this, the film becomes a road film, literally. Father and son who are still tense, the son exceedingly angry with his father and his absence from his life, surly and resentful, reluctantly agrees (what else can he do?) To go driving into the scenery of northern Norway. They camp, have arguments, risk driving without sufficient petrol and have to walk into a town on a lake where they hire a room, the boy encountering a rebellious young teenager so some moments of sharing, both anger and music.

Then the father reveals to his son that they are going on a three day hike in the mountains. Needless to say the sun is not happy. However, they drove along the gravel road, into the fog and emerge in beautiful terrain, trees and bright, even red, vegetation. The father wants to confess his past philandering and abandonment to his son and the sun is completely unwilling to hear this. When the father awakes in the tent and finds his son gone, he pursues him, searching through the mountains, the boy then running away, the father tackling him – and some release of anger from the boy.

Actually, nothing particularly new except the scenery – and that may be enough for audiences to follow through familiar father-son tensions and some beginnings of resolution.

1. A film about father-son relationships? In the context of a trip to northern Norway?

2. The importance of the locations, Berlin, building site, apartments? The contrast with Norway, the mountains and forests, the roads, the lakes…? The musical score?

3. Introduction to Michael, his hard hat, sitting, surveying, contemplating, ringing his sister, the death of their father, distance from his sister, explanations, her not being able to forgive, nor go to the funeral? His relationship with Leyla? His edginess, her taking offence, telling him about her journalist post to Washington for a year, his non-reaction? His going to the funeral, taking his son?

4. Introduction to Luis, age, separated from his father, his father’s bad behaviour, relying on his mother but arguing with her, liking her boyfriend? Surliness, anger with his father? His bad behaviour? Sullen responses? Feeling a victim?

5. The plane trip, the son unwilling, the father ordering him? At the graveside, the priest, her greeting and walking away?

6. The film becoming a road film, going north, the scenery of Norway? Camping out? Antagonisms between father and son? The risk of no petrol, stopping, walking to the town, hiring a cabin, getting the petrol, Luis and his meeting Cecilia, their talk, her resentment against her parents taking her away from friends for a holiday, sharing music? The family giving them a lift back to the car with their petrol?

7. Going on, scenes of the road, scenery? The three day hike and the plan? Luis’s negative reaction?

8. The very long sequence of the gravel road and the camera filming through the windscreen? Time for the audience to contemplate the themes and relationships?,

9. Through the fog, the beauty of the top of the mountains, the flora? Camping, Luis going for the walk, his father looking for him, falling, continuing, the boy running away from his father, the father catching him? Bearing down on him making him unable to move?

10. The talk about the past, Luis unwilling to hear? His father’s confession?

11. The return home, his mother meeting him, the embrace with his father – and looking back? The future?

THE QUEEN OF SPAIN

Spain, 2017, 128 minutes, Colour.
Penelope Cruz, Antonio Resines, Chino Darin, Javier Camara, Jorge Sans, Cary Elwes, Mandy Patinkin, Clive Revill, Loles Leon, Neus Assensi.
Directed by Fernando Trueba.

This kind of film is usually described as a romp, with words to describe it like “rollicking�!

This is an ambitious production, written and directed by Fernando Trueba, Oscar-winner for Best Foreign Language Film, La Belle Epoque, 1992. At first, the title could refer to Queen Isabella of Spain and her rule, and dominance, in the late 15th century. However, there is a strong focus on a glamorous Spanish actress who goes to Hollywood, marries a prominent producer, divorces, is seen as a star, returns to Spain for the filming of The Queen of Spain – but it is the actress who is, of course, the Queen of Spain.

The setting is the late 1940s into the early 1950s. The film is very helpful in offering an initial collage of scenes showing the experience of Spain from the Civil War, the emergence of General Franco, Spain’s role during World War II, the end of the war, the Franco era and the sense of control, even repression. Part of the collage is showing the glamour of Hollywood in the 1940s, star popularity, the fans and gossip, the popularity of the movies.

Penelope Cruz is the star, the queen. She gets the start treatment from the press, from the American producers – the filming of the film within the film has American money, something Franco Spain is happy to accept. There is an American director played by Clive Revill who is generally asleep, wakened to say action or cut, something of a parody on John Ford. Mandy Patinkin is the writer, doing hack work because he has been blacklisted during the Mc Carthy era. There is an American actor, Cary Elwes, playing Ferdinand, quite a camp character and, self-important.

There is a range of characters, some oddball, who are part of the Spanish set – but who have an important role in the latter part of the film, eccentricities and all. There is the costume designer, married to a homosexual head of Department; there is a Spanish actor who has seen better days, who is to play the Moorish king, but has hopes of an invitation to Hollywood; there is Trini, the stars personal assistant – not afraid to spread the gossip; and there is the assistant director, played by Javier Camara, frequently in Almodovar films, serious in his work and managing things so that all goes well.

There is a serious tone when a former director who has been missing for many years turns up, welcome back even though everybody thought he was dead – but was in a concentration camp. He is given work has second unit director and seems ready for a comeback when his suddenly arrested, disappears to a working site were an enormous cross is being erected out of stone in memory of the recent past. He is the target of this attempts on his life.

This all comes together in a plot initiated by the star, and aided by one of the young technicians whom she has seduced, to get the motley troop to affect and escape for the prisoner. This is where the film becomes particularly rollicking, the plan, the execution, using the filming of soldiers on horseback, with the star disguised as one, extricating the prisoner and eluding the authorities to get him out of Spain. A happy blend of humour and excitement.

Plenty of characters, plenty of ingredients, scenes from the actual film – including an extraordinary insertion of Queen Isabella singing the contemporary song, Granada, roaming the battlements!

At the end, Generalissimo Franco decides to visit the set, keeping the Americans and they trying to keep in favour of Spain. While the film has been very anti-Franco, it is a scene where the star, now an American citizen, his father was killed in one Franco’s prisons, speaks out a defiance against fascism.

A movie movie, so to speak, with a great deal of humour, with a great deal of gossip, and many serious undertones.

1. The title, the 20th-century story, the making of the film? About Queen Isabella? A contemporary actress as a contemporary Queen of Spain?

2. The lavish production values, costumes and decor, re-creation of period? The US and Hollywood, Spain and the studios, the countryside? Prisoners, the camp for making the giant cross? The escape episodes? The musical score?

3. The film as rollicking, a romp? Its tone, satire and spoof, the use of caricatures, camp dialogue, Hollywood gossip..?

4. The cast, Penelope Cruz, the Spanish cast, the international cast?

5. The prologue and the collage essay on Spain from the time of the Civil War, Franco, into the 1940s, Hitler, the Allies, the end of the war? The Franco era? Repression? The movies, Hollywood, glamour, marriages and divorce? The glitzy tone and glamour?

6. Spain, in the late 40s and early 1950s, the Spanish film industry, production, American investment? Developing a sense of history? The stars, the ambitions of the Spanish cast? Franco and his officials supervising film, but wanting American money? The American producers and their presence, deals, the writer and his having to do hack work, the director always asleep – and the parody of John Ford? The American star and his camp style? The American attitudes toward Spain? The locals, especially the assistant director and his role, his concern, efficiency, technical skills?

7. Macarena, her return to Spain, the plane journey, press conference and her platitudes? The presence of Trini, her manner, style, gossip, protecting Macarena – but telling all about the gossip? Macarena as an American citizen, and marriages and divorce, the affairs, her promiscuous behaviour, eyeing of Leo, seductive? Her manner? Her career, filming, wanting to understand her character better, the discussions with the writer? The reappearance of Fontiveres, her past relationship with him? Leo, working on the set, the sexual invitation, hitting him as well? The scenes of narrative and her manner as Queen Isabella? And the singing of Grenada?

8. Fontiveres, sudden appearance, his age, bearing, everybody’s reactions, happy memories of him, his past and his skills, his wife and her astonishment? The daughter’s wedding and her not wanting him to be present? His being in the concentration camp? The friends, welcoming back, the reaction, the producer giving him the second unit direction and his success with the action shots? The police, his disappearing, in prison, the building of the statue, hard labour, working with his friends, the police and the orders to kill him, the building collapse and his injuries? Macarena’s visit, pretending to be his daughter, his amorous response? Going to the mine, the further collapse, the setup for his death? The plan for his escape, being ready, the collaboration, his being picked up, changing his clothes, in the van? The vans to Barcelona, Rosa and her performance and Fontiveres responding, their not being taken?

9. The Fontiveres action, uniting the mixed group, their political views, interest in their careers, participating? Leo, his ideas and participation? The writer and the background of his being in the Civil War, being blacklisted by Senator Mc Carthy?

10. The ensemble, Lucia and her work, costumes, marrying the homosexual, and lesbianism, trying with Macarena? The homosexual man, his camp manner, eyeing the men, floating? Prim manner? Julian, self-importance, his roles, the Moorish king, hopes for Hollywood, the discussions with the American actor, the sexual humiliation? His explanation of how he was able to weep on cue? The offer for the American Pirate film with Errol Flynn? Rosa, touring South America, age, her role as the Moorish mother? Performing in the theatre? The solution for getting Fontiveres to Barcelona and to the French border? Fontiveres’ wife, the shock, not want him at the wedding, visiting Macarena, persuading her to visit her husband in prison?

11. The writer, sensible, taking over the direction, the black list? His wanting to be in on the escape? The producer and the money issues? The parody with the director, asleep, saying the official words? Attracted to Macarena? A parody of John Ford – even to the eyepatch?

12. The assistant director, earnest, his skills, getting the riders in action…?

13. The escape plan and its execution, Macarena and Leo dressed as soldiers, Julian as Moorish but riding in? Everybody with their task, the bike, the van, the change of clothes, the phone calls and Trini breaking the code? The police holding them up, getting through?

14. The American actor, self-importance, camp, sexual, eyeing Julian, the cuffs and the torture roller, the sexual experience and his later comments?

15. The film itself, the style of epics of the 1950s – touch of history and corniness, and the singing of Jews?

16. Franco coming to the set, meeting everyone, his meeting Macarena and her defying him?

SAGE FEMME/ THE MIDWIFE

France, 2017, 105 minutes, Colour.
Catherine Frot, Catherine Deneuve, Olivier Gourmet, Quentin Dolmaire, Mylene Demongeot.
Directed by Martin Provost.

It is a pleasure to see two important actresses working together. In 2016 Catherine Frot made a powerful impression as Marguerite, the French equivalent of the off-key singer, Florence Foster Jenkins. Catherine Deneuve, in her early 70s, has been making films, quite prolifically, and receiving top billing since 1964, a French icon.

The title, Sage Femme is the French for Midwife. The emphasis is very female – but there are lines of dialogue in this film to indicate that the name will have to be changed, both in French and English, with men becoming significant in birthing. The son of Catherine Frot’s Claire tells his mother that he is stopping his medical studies but that he intends to work as a midwife.

The film opens with quite a number of births scenes, an opportunity to show Claire and her skills, her ability to deal with mothers giving birth, to encourage, to cajole, to sympathise, and spreading her expertise to the attending nurses. There are other sequences throughout the film enabling us to appreciate Claire’s commitment and professionalism. She is also unhappy at the move to great technological change in care for mothers and birth, moving away from the personalised midwife care.

And Catherine Deneuve? She plays an older woman, Beatrice, who wants to get in contact with Claire’s father with whom she had a relationship decades earlier. This puts a great strain on Claire who is very serious at the best of times. It means going back into her past, her attitude towards her father, her resentment towards Beatrice, her long held the ring that Beatrice had betrayed her.

The main complication is that Beatrice announces that she has terminal cancer, tumours. Claire is very positive in her outlook on illness and recovery and, at first, it is her sense of medical duty that she gives attention to Beatrice. Which is not always easy because Beatrice is one of those people who can never settle down, is always out on the town, is still smoking despite warnings, fond of a drink, and a propensity for gambling. She switches moods in an incident, upset, then over-gracious.

There is one other complication, apart from Claire’s son and his fiancee announcing that she is pregnant. Claire has a garden plot on the outskirts of the city, working with her vegetables, and encounters the son of the manager, Paul (Olivier Gourmet) an international truck driver who befriends Claire, a genial and obliging man, someone who can open up Claire and her capacity for one-to-one affection. There is an exhilarating scene at the end where Claire, Beatrice and Paul go for a country drive in the lorry and Beatrice gets the opportunity to drive.

So, it is a great pleasure to see the two actresses embody these two characters, their interactions, the changing relationship, going back into memories, and the possibilities for some reconciliation and forgiveness. Bringing to birth, so to speak, a new life of relationships.

1. A French drama, French style?

2. The title, a women’s film, characters, the tradition of midwives being women and the comments made about birthing experts and the role of men?

3. Paris, the outlying town, the vegetable gardens? Apartments, hospitals, shops, the gardens? The musical score?

4. The title, Claire seen in a variety of birth sequences? Her sympathies, reassurance of the mothers? The nursing staff, the surgeon? The women, happiness, fears, dangers, Caesarean, emergencies? The father and the camera?

5. Claire, her age, her life? Her love for her son? His engagement to Lucie? Meeting the two, the announcement of the pregnancy, her being upset?

6. Beatrice and her phone call, Claire and Beatrice, agreeing to the meeting, the difficulties of the meeting?

7. The memories of her father, his affair with Beatrice, his relationship to his wife, her pregnancy, not having an abortion? Claire knowing Beatrice when she was in her teens? Beatrice leaving, betrayal? The bitterness of the mother, and for Claire? The slides, father and his swimming, Olympic Championships? The resemblance to his grandson?

8. Beatrice, her Princess name, the truth, revealing it to Claire? Her growing up? Her relationships? Her relationship with Hunt Antoine, the difficulties, finance, his career, her leaving? The shock of discovering that he committed suicide? The effect on her, her moods?

9. Beatrice and the announcement of the cancer, the tumours, discussions with the doctor, Claire and her positive outlook about life, Beatrice never having been unwell before? Smoking, drinking, gambling and winning, the need for Claire, having no one else, living in friends’ apartments, the lease and her having to move out, the gift of the ring to Claire, Claire present after the operation? The doctor talking to Claire, his fears, the tumours deeper? Claire and her presence, taking Beatrice out, shopping, the drives? Taking her in, preparing the room?

10. Beatrice and her need for money, getting Claire to write the checks, the visit to Rolande?

11. Work at the garden, the encounter with Paul, their talking, his being lorry driver, bonding? Simon and Lucie arriving, Simon swimming? The growing relationship with Claire, his coming to the house to help Beatrice when Claire was on duty, Claire’s reaction? The three in the drive in the lorry and Beatrice’s exhilaration?

12. Simon, Lucie, the pregnancy, his giving up his course, wanting to be a midwife? The visit to the house, discovering the slides of his grandfather? Beatrice and her kiss?

13. Beatrice, the drives, getting food, with the local kids, giving them cigarettes, not able to pawn her gold watch? The collapse, the various ups and downs, her decision to leave, the letter for Claire, in her debt? Claire refusing any offer of money from the will?

14. Claire searching for Beatrice, putting on the ring, the letter with the lipstick kiss? The boat in the water and Paul seeing it? The completion of Beatrice’s life? Life in the future for Paul and Claire?

DISCREET

US, 2017, 81 minutes, Colour.
Jonny Mars, Atsuko Okatsuka, Joy Cunningham, Jordan Elsass, Bob Swaffer.
Directed by Travis Matthews.

Travis Matthews has been making films, especially experimental films, since 2000. He has a particular interest in male sexuality and themes of homosexuality.

This is a narrative, albeit in a non-continuous style, separate episodes, discrete episodes, which means that the audience have to be particularly attentive all the time and to extract the main thrust of the story.

The film has a reverberating soundtrack, often difficult to interpret, but bearing on the mood and atmosphere of the film.

As a framework, a woman appears who is running a video service helping people with meaning in life. She recurs throughout the film, inviting people to watch her videos – but the protagonist of the film, Alex (Jonny Mars) also wants to make videos and keeps phoning her to make an appointment, almost stalking her verbally, with the result that she cuts him off completely.

His videos seem to be concerned with male sexuality and there are a couple of comparatively explicit scenes again throughout the film.

The main character is called Alex, and we see him with a woman, discussing his life, his separation from her, her background of drinking and her trying to reform. She is very supportive of him.

We also see him going to a farm, and he is challenged by an older man who was accompanying a very, very tall man with a white beard and a shaking hand who cannot speak and is being led in his walk. Alex claims to be his grandson. As the film progresses and Alex moves in with the old man, even hiring a young man to help him look after him, the audience becomes suspicious about the relationship, the antagonism and Alex’s concern and care, for example eating, dressing, washing.

What also emerges is that the man had abused Alex as a child and he is building up to revenge – which eventually happens, leading the old man down to the river, and the audience just hearing gunshots, not seeing them.

Audiences will have to persevere, some relishing all the detail and the episodes about the videos, others mystified as to what was happening and where it was leading – but it all comes together in the end.

BERLIN SYNDROME

Australia, 2017, 116 minutes, Colour.
Teresa Palmer, Max Riemelt, Matthias Habich, Emma Bading.
Directed by Cate Shortland.

Cate Shortland has had an interesting career in both direction and writing. Her 2004 film Somersault won most of the awards at the Australian Film Institute awards, including best film and director. She made the striking film about Germany during the war and the consequences of indoctrination, Lore, and also won many awards. She contributed to the writing of the excellent miniseries, Devil’s Playground. She has not written this screenplay. It is by Shaun Grant and based on a novel by Melanie Joosten.

Once again, Cate Shortland is in Germany, but this time contemporary Berlin. A central protagonist is Clare, a persuasive performance by Teresa Palmer, initially naive and wide-eyed, sexually available, charmed by one of the locals. He is a teacher, Andi, played very well by Max Riemelt.

A classic William Wyler film of the 1960s, one of his final films, was a two-hander psychological thriller, The Collector, with Terence Stamp as the collector and Samantha Eggar as his victim. Berlin Syndrome is a 21st-century variation on The Collector.

Berlin in summer looks an interesting and attractive city, Clare arriving, immediately being welcomed by a group of young people to share a drink and talk, her settling into her room, phoning her mother in Brisbane, going shopping for clothes and slides because her interest is in studying the architecture of the East Germany period. She also comes across an agreeable young man, Andi (Max Riemelt) who, surprisingly, turns up again, exercising a great charm – for which she falls.

Andi is the kind of young man who looks as if he would not hurt a fly – perhaps not a fly but certainly women. He imprisons Clare in his apartment, locking her in while he goes to school, teaching English literature, the work of James Baldwin, to a young and interested class. It is a sport school and he also supervises team exercises, with an eye on the young student, Franka, which she interprets correctly to his annoyance and a moment where she sees Clare.

As might be expected from this kind of story, Andi exhibits a kind of Jekyll and Hyde personality, a pleasing Jekyll as he goes out into the world, a sadistic Hyde in his behaviour at home, tying Clare up, then attempting to spoil her by meals and gifts. He might have some head idea about what it is like to be captive but he seems to be particularly carefree, although when Clare reacts in anger, he also shows anger.

The months pass, the seasons change, from summer to Christmas, to New Year. While the action of the film goes outside the apartment, giving the audience a sense of freedom, nevertheless when we are back with Clare we share her confinement, her frustrations. We are also puzzled as to whether she is going to be an ultimate victim (it seems there has been a previous victim, one at least, from Canada) or whether she will escape.

One moment for understanding Andi is when he visits his father, a lecturer, reminisces about his mother leaving (and certainly Andi is angry at this) and then, later, find his father dead.

The film has a contemporary look and feel, perhaps not the kind of story we were expecting from Cate Shortland, but an interesting variation on The Collector theme.

1. The title, location of syndromes and Stockholm Syndrome for prisoners assimilating to their captors? The overtones of the Berlin setting?

2. An Australian production, filmed in Berlin? The views of the city, the streets, buildings, apartment blocks, apartments, shops, the school, the classroom, the sports stadium? The musical score in the moods?

3. Application of stories like The Collector, the victims, the oppressors?

4. Clare, from Brisbane, her age, her studies, photography, interest in East German buildings? Arrival, wide-eyed, invitation to the social, the friendly group? Her shopping, dresses, the slides? The encounter with Andi, his being pleasant, attractive, his finding her again?

5. Going to the apartment, pleasant, the sexual encounter, the aftermath? Her being locked in? Her being tied up? The stages of reaction, anger, trying the doors, the key holes? His treatment of her, harsh, sexual, sadistic? His gifts, the meals, shopping? The Christmas gift of books? The underwear? The parcels? Her becoming passive, her fighting back, stabbing his hand and his hurting hers? Smashing the windows? The furniture? Time passing, the seasons, Christmas, the celebration, the cake, the hymns and songs in the background? New Year, the fireworks? Her sense of imprisonment? Her being seen when Franka visited her teacher?

6. Andi, nice, his charm, the sexual encounter, turning sadistic, tying Clare up, the shifting manner, the details of their domestic life, leaving, locking her in, coming back? At school, his English class, the books of James Baldwin, Steinbeck? His students? Training at sport? His gaze at Franka? Her visit, his anger, her anger? Discussions with the staff, menacing the woman who took his mug, talking about dates, the New Year’s party, the teacher asking him to leave? Correcting the work, going back to class? The photo Clare placed in the book, from his pornographic collection? The photo dropping on the floor, Franka’s disappearance, his reaction, driving, caught in the traffic?

7. His relationship with his father, going to the lecture, the complaint about the mother leaving them, his innate anger, the discussions, ideas, sharing? Discovering his father dead?

8. The outing the woods, the child with the hurt leg, Clare attempting to give information, the boy not speaking English?

9. Clare, Andi texting her mother? Franka seeing her? Franka coming, getting out, her alluring Andi, physically attacking him, locking him in? His sitting in the chair and reading about her disappearance?

10. The effect of this experience? The sadism of the Collector?

JOAQUIM

Brazil, 2017, 97 minutes, Colour.
Julio Machado.
Directed by Marcelo Gomez.


This is a Brazilian film set in the 18th century in the countryside of Brazil.

It opens very strikingly, a head on a pike outside a church and a voice-over from the dead man explaining who he was, his being part of the military authority, his search for gold on behalf of the authorities, his wanting gold for himself – but also his reading books, learning some of the philosophy of the Americans of the 18th century and their human rights and freedom, leading him to become part of revolutionary action, but his being executed, the only one of the group beheaded and drawn and quartered.

The film then goes back to see him in his activities, on expeditions and dealing with his fellow officials as well as his personal servant, slave, and local Indians. He is part of a checkpoint where the authorities examine the gold findings and see if they are authentic or not, and will lead to further exploration. There is a servant on the checkpoint, an Indian, Blackie, who serves the food, interacts with all the people, has a sexual relationship with Joachim. Later she disappears.

Joachim has some new energy, his hair is cut by Blackie, he is asked to lead a group to go out into the countryside and prospect. The group spends a lot of time, panning in the rivers. But then food and supplies dwindle and the men demand that they return to the checkpoint, Joachim unwillingly. On his return, he gives some of his findings to the governor who makes all kinds of promises then steals the findings and goes to Rio. Joachim has read a great deal, being given books by a poet. He then goes out by himself to find gold, encounters the Indians who are hostile to him, but especially Blackie who stands against him. He is released and goes back to the checkpoint.

Religion has been absent from the film but now Joachim meets a priest who is associated with a revolutionary movement, along with the poet, and Joachim commits himself to action. There is a dinner scene with most of the people concerned, discussions about revolution – and then the film ends. We have seen the ending at the beginning of the film.

This is more of film for historians of Latin America and those interested in the revolutionary movements on that continent.

ON THE BEACH AT NIGHT ALONE

Korea, 2017, 101 minutes, Colour.
Kim Min-hee.
Directed by Hong Sang-soo.

The director is always interested in relationships, power, sexuality (Woman is the future of man, Haewon). This is a contemporary film.

The first part of the film is set in Germany, in Hamburg, an actress is visiting and staying with a friend. For 30 minutes, the film is really conversation between the two women, revealing the past of the actress and her relationship with the director and her deciding to leave Korea and visit Germany, the other woman being older, a good friend, who prefers to live alone. There are comparatively few Germans to be seen, but the older woman sees an agent about renting an apartment, they go to a music store where they meet a friendly composer and buy his book of music, and are hosted by a German couple at a meal.

The second part of the film is longer, set in Korea. The actress has returned to Korea and is meeting with friends. Once again, the film is primarily conversation, but it is conversation generally in groups. The actress finds a friend who is now working in a restaurant, reminiscing about the past, making some advances, but he is committed to his work and to the woman who runs the restaurant. There are other conversations, involving older friends.

There is a lot of smoking and drinking, and the actress swings in her moods, sometimes being sensible, other times flirtatious and challenging. She plays with the idea of living with another woman, kissing her friend.

However, the conversation simply rouses the past for the actress and she goes to walk on the beach, lying down and going to sleep. She is awakened and invited over to join film technicians who are scouting locations. She is at home with them – and invited to a meal where the director with whom she had a previous relationship is present. They talk, he gives her a gift of a book after reading a passage about relationships, but she has been drinking and is stirred up to talk to the director, to remember the past, to criticise him, to judge him.

And then, she is lying on the beach again – woken up and she realises that she has been dreaming. It is what might have happened – and what might happen.

COLO

Portugal, 2017, 136 minutes, Colour.
Alice Albergaria Borges, Joao Pedro Vaz. Beatriz Batarda, Clara Jost.
Directed by Teresa Villaverde.

Colo was screened in competition at the Berlinale of 2017.

This is a long film and, except for devotees of very serious cinema, it does not hold the interest throughout. It is a very talkative film but most of the principal characters remain enigmatic.

It is a Portuguese film about family as well is about outsiders. The setting is Lisbon, streets and departments, interiors, school. The emphasis in dialogue and conversations.

The central character is the father, around 50, retrenched from his work, full of anxiety, making phone calls to get other jobs, upset when his wife doesn’t return when he expected, taking a friend from the past to the beach, threatening him about the job – the man punching the father and running away and driving off. The father is left of the beach, later stripping and going into the water, coming out wet. He says he is agreeable that his wife having another job to make ends meet, but they are gradually using up all their funds.

The wife seems quite a sensible woman, practical, but her husband’s behaviour, caring for her daughter getting her down, she loses her extra job and decided it would be better if she went away for a while, living in a hotel, her husband and daughter going to live with her mother – which they do, the mother welcoming them.

The other main character is the daughter, at school, interested in design, with a boyfriend and sexual relationships, studying, puzzled about her father, supportive of her mother. She is also supportive of another girl at school who, it seems obvious, is pregnant. The pregnant girl has nowhere to go, has not told her parents, and the daughter of the family invites her to live in – the father taking compassion on her and even saying that it will take responsibility for the child.

So, with an array of characters in contemporary problems, the film is both emotional and cerebral, especially with this dialogue – and the audience is left with: so what…?