L’OMBRE DU MONT- ST- MICHEL/ SHADOW OF MONT ST MICHEL

France 2010. 90 minutes, Colour.
Claire Borotra, Serge Hazanavicius, Thomas Jouannet.
Directed by Klaus Biedermann.

The Shadow of Mont St Michel is a telemovie, a murder mystery. Because it is set under the shadow of the famous monastery, cut off at times from the Normandy coast by the tides, it has become a celebrated tourist centre as well as religious centre. The continual presence of the monastery is striking, filmed at various times of the day and from various angles, the exteriors and interiors. It is certainly an attraction for tourists who watch the film.

The murder mystery seems to have all kinds of psychological repercussions with a touch of the supernatural. This is played out for most of the film – but, ultimately, it becomes a rather simple and tawdry resolution.

The film focuses on two sisters who visit Mont Saint Michel after the death of their mother. The younger sister imagines that the local mayor is her father, becomes jealous of his actual daughter. When the mayor’s daughter is found dead, suspicions are on the young woman. However, her sister (who is revealed finally as her mother) wants to prove her innocence. Two friends from her school days are on the island, one a guide, the other a doctor. The doctor comes under suspicion – especially when a rather sinister monk is also murdered. However, the death is ultimately revealed as an accident with an approach to the young woman by the guide. This makes the film more of a time passer than a serious psychological drama.

1. A film of psychology relationships? The mystery?

2. The settings, the island, the monastery, imposing beautiful, its size, dominating the countryside and the sea? The use of the monastery throughout the film? Elise’s question? Score?

3. The opening, Elise going into the water – and 30 minutes later its being shown something of a red herring?

4. Elise and Audrey? Their mothers death? Audrey and her memories of her mother being pushed the staircase the argument about who was her father? This haunting Audrey? Especially in the monastery, in the light coming from the sky – in the meeting of the cosmos with vibrations of the universe, the reality of what happened, the accidental death of her mother? Audiences believing this or not? Audrey and the revelation about the mayor, his not being her father?

5. Audrey as a character, withdrawn, struck by lightning, the hospital, amnesia? Her wanting to get away in the truck? Elise bringing her back to the centre of the street, remembering the truth? Under suspicion?

6. Elise, the background, growing up in Mont St Michel, friendship with Yann and Romain? Studies, leaving? An interpreter? Her return – and the truth about her relationship with Romain? Her being the mother of Audrey?

7. Yann, his wife, friendly, right? The tour of the monastery? His concern, help? The revelation that he had killed the young woman? The accident? The medal and the clue? Planting it? The death of the monk?

8. Romain, doctor, in love with Elise? Her leaving? The return, the relationship? His being under suspicion? The revelation of the truth?

9. The Mayor, his friendship with the girl’s mother, the implication that he was Audrey’s father? Not the truth? His own daughter, his concern, the death? His grief?

10. The daughter, friendship with Audrey, going out together, her death? The attack? The revelation of what really happened? Their trying to help Audrey?

11. The monk, his talk about the cosmos and the vibes? The medal? Confronted by Elise? His death? The police inspector, suspicions, doing his job, interrogations?

12. The melodramatic ending, two of the monastery? Yann and Audrey, the threats? Romain and his wanting to rescue the women? Audrey falling over the parapet, Elise reaching out, Romain bringing her to safety? And the happy ending?

THE IDOL

Palestine, 2015, 100 minutes, Colour.
Tawfeek Barhom, Kais Attalah.
Directed by Hany Abu -Assad.

The Idol is based on a true story, the history of Mohammed Assaf, a little boy seen in Gaza in 2005, playing with his friends, with his tomboy sister, his parents trying to keep an eye on them and their discipline – but his having a strong singing voice which the children capitalise on in raising money by singing in the streets, and then, when his sister has kidney disease, singing at various weddings and functions to raise money for her surgery.

The young boy, Kais Attalah, plays Mohammed in a very sympathetic way. He is less sympathetic when he grows older, is studying at the University but driving a taxi to raise funds. He still sings, but is an angry young man, falls out with the sympathetic coach who helped him when he was young, wants to give up singing.

An encounter with a young woman, a childhood friend of his sister when they both had kidney treatment, is a passenger in his taxi, encourages him to sing – and he makes the decision then to try for Arab Idol. He practices, reconciles with his coach, gets the support of his parents. Actual elements from his story include his getting a forged passport, smuggling himself into Egypt to go to Cairo for auditions for the show, his being too late to get a ticket, his getting a ticket from a Palestinian young man who hears him singing. He impresses the producers, goes through the auditions, goes for the various weeks of the program including filming in Beirut. He is nervous, is in contact with his family, has a panic attack, but is encouraged by the young woman and her faith in him – and he goes on to win the program.

With the announcing of the winner, the film makes a transition to the actual sequences with Mohammed Assaf – with a great deal of footage of the enthusiasm of the people of Gaza and Palestine celebrating the win and Mohammed giving international voice to their situation.

1. The true story? 21st-century story? Palestinian story? In the context of the Israeli occupation? The Arab world, Gaza, Palestine, Egypt, Lebanon?

2. The atmosphere of Gaza, the initial chase of the children and racing through all the areas of Gaza city, streets, homes, buildings, vehicles, touches of prosperity, touches of oppression? The later sequences in Gaza, the streets and the ruined buildings? The border with Egypt, the tunnels, passport control? Egypt, Cairo, the lavish buildings, the auditorium? Beirut?

3. The title, popular television shows of the 21st-century, the various local Idol programs, the wide audiences, the national feeling, the glitzy style?

4. The music, Arabic songs, rhythms, lyrics, particularly distinctive?

5. The two parts of the film, the focus on Mohammed as a boy, as a teenager? The two actors and their performances?

6. Mohammed and his friends, little boys, up to mischief, playing together, Nour and her presence, the tomboy? The mother and her strictness, discipline? The role of the father?

7. Mohammed, his ability to sing, Nour and her promotion, the friends and their playing instruments? Saving the money, going to the smuggler, his promise to get the instruments, their going back, his going back on his word, bashing Mohammed? Mohammed later going to see him to get the forged passport? The role of smugglers in Palestine?

8. Singing in the street, collecting the money, the boys going on the barrels to collect the fish and selling them, pursuing the man who didn’t pay?

9. Nour, her illness, dialysis, the need for a kidney, Mohammed not compatible? Trying to raise the money, singing at functions, weddings, the many scenes of performance, the audience dancing? Mohammed and his wanting to get the money from the entrepreneur?

10. The music coach, the brass instruments, his listening to Mohammed, training him, for many years? Mohammed older, his resentments, walking out on the coach?

11. Mohammed at the University, driving the taxi, the encounter with the young girl with her kidney problems, memories of the past and his sister? Her praising his voice, asking him to sing in the taxi? Seeing her going to the hospital? His decision to go back on his word, on his animosity toward singing and the coach?

12. Discussions with his parents, their ultimate support? Going back to the coach, his encouragement, singing with passion?

13. His boyhood friend, going to the strict interpretation of Islam, that singing was immoral, his giving information and the military arrest of the musicians? Mohammed getting the passport, going to the border, hiding, the back of the truck, getting into passport control, singing and the officer letting him through, the encounter with his friend and the appeal, his being allowed into Egypt?

14. Lining up, not having a ticket, climbing into the building on the upper floors? Singing in the toilet, the encounter with the Palestinian young man, getting the ticket, his support?

15. The various auditions and performances? The effect on Mohammed? Phone calls home? Accepted on the show? The many sequences of celebration in Gaza? The political significance, for Palestinians, for Israel? For an Arab voice to be heard?

16. Continued success, going to Lebanon? His nerves, the panic attack, the hospital? The support of the judges and producers, their faith in him?

17. His performances, television? Waiting for the announcement of the winner?

18. The transition to sequences with the actual Mohammed, his win, acceptance, the consequences?

19. A morale-boosting Palestinian film, the importance of popular music, of the widespread influence of television, people united for the talent television quests?

FINDING SAINT FRANCIS

UK, 75 minutes, Colour.
Written and directed by Paul Alexander.

Finding St Francis is something that all of us like to do even when we think we know him well – there is always more to discover.

The film was produced by a British group, lay associates of the Franciscans, devoted to promoting St Francis and his spirituality. While another film version of St Francis’s life would always be welcome, there have been quite a number, notably Michael Curtiz’s Francis of Assisi from the 1960s, Franco Zeffirelli’s Brother, Sister Moon from the 1970s and several Francis films by Liliana Cavani from the 1960s to the present. Roberto Rossellini directed a film of St Francis and the legendary stories about him, called the Little Flowers of St Francis, 1951.

This film takes a different tack. It is set in a Franciscan house in the English countryside. A middle-aged man undergoing something of a personal search, arrives at the friary and encounters a group of the lay associates and friars. They are listening to a talk on St Francis by the director, Paul Alexander. He sees something in the man, discusses his situation with him and offers him the role of Francis in the forthcoming film. He accepts and, as he undertakes the role, he sees parallels with his own life.

The budget was limited but several actors and amateurs are used in the film to present the equivalent of Francis’s life but in a contemporary setting and with contemporary costumes. For the pictorial background of Assisi and the surrounding countryside as well as visits to Rome, colour sketches are used effectively. And there is the musical score.

The screenplay traces the details of Francis’s life, many of which are familiar, but which it is important and interesting to hear again: the background and the wealth of his merchant father, his French mother, his early and rather carefree life, his military service… This includes giving away his armour and horse to a needy soldier, but his father supplying substitutes.

Important for the development and for the spirituality of Francis, there are scenes where he encounters a poor man and has such a personal experience in the meeting that he falls in love with Lady Poverty. This is more than reinforced in his encounter with the leper, his appearance and stench, and the compulsion to kiss him. There is also the confrontation with his father when he strips off his clothes and leaves home for ever.

In the life of the Franciscans, there are scenes of the rebuilding of San Damiano, of other churches in Assisi, of living at the Portiuncula, and the coming of various friend s and associates who want to share his life and his poverty and charity. And the same is true of the young woman, Clare, who embraces the spirit of Francis.

Francis was something of a free spirit, becoming a deacon but never a priest, sometimes preaching effectively, sometimes reticent. At one stage, keen to meet the Muslims, he ventures to meet the leaders. But, it is in his meeting with Pope Innocent III that there is drama, the Pope wary of him, agreeing to consider the church’s approbation of the Franciscan movement, his dream of Francis supporting the collapsing church, and the approval given.

The film also highlights how Francis was not really an institutional man, having difficulties with a friar who wanted to have his own prayer book, castigating him that this was against poverty – but also falling foul of his successor, Brother Leo, who wanted structure and order in the movement.

Not every scene is as successful as the other – and it is interesting as well is distracting to see the same actor turning up in a variety of roles, from Francis’s stern father to a benign friar. And, for the performances, it is not as if many of the people are so much acting but rather, in the manner of a staged play or pageant, they are role-playing, the audience at the talk sometimes visible, and the intercutting of scenes and the talk.

In these days of Pope Francis, there has been more movement towards finding St Francis, discovering and appreciating his spirituality – and this is the kind of documentary-drama that opens up the story of Francis and would be well worth seeing and listening to in anticipation of nurse preparation for watching one of the fuller feature film versions.

FINDING SAINT FRANCIS

UK, 75 minutes, Colour.
Written and directed by Paul Alexander.

Finding St Francis is something that all of us like to do even when we think we know him well – there is always more to discover.

The film was produced by a British group, lay associates of the Franciscans, devoted to promoting St Francis and his spirituality. While another film version of St Francis’s life would always be welcome, there have been quite a number, notably Michael Curtiz’s Francis of Assisi from the 1960s, Franco Zeffirelli’s Brother, Sister Moon from the 1970s and several Francis films by Liliana Cavani from the 1960s to the present. Roberto Rossellini directed a film of St Francis and the legendary stories about him, called the Little Flowers of St Francis, 1951.

This film takes a different tack. It is set in a Franciscan house in the English countryside. A middle-aged man undergoing something of a personal search, arrives at the friary and encounters a group of the lay associates and friars. They are listening to a talk on St Francis by the director, Paul Alexander. He sees something in the man, discusses his situation with him and offers him the role of Francis in the forthcoming film. He accepts and, as he undertakes the role, he sees parallels with his own life.

The budget was limited but several actors and amateurs are used in the film to present the equivalent of Francis’s life but in a contemporary setting and with contemporary costumes. For the pictorial background of Assisi and the surrounding countryside as well as visits to Rome, colour sketches are used effectively. And there is the musical score.

The screenplay traces the details of Francis’s life, many of which are familiar, but which it is important and interesting to hear again: the background and the wealth of his merchant father, his French mother, his early and rather carefree life, his military service… This includes giving away his armour and horse to a needy soldier, but his father supplying substitutes.

Important for the development and for the spirituality of Francis, there are scenes where he encounters a poor man and has such a personal experience in the meeting that he falls in love with Lady Poverty. This is more than reinforced in his encounter with the leper, his appearance and stench, and the compulsion to kiss him. There is also the confrontation with his father when he strips off his clothes and leaves home for ever.

In the life of the Franciscans, there are scenes of the rebuilding of San Damiano, of other churches in Assisi, of living at the Portiuncula, and the coming of various friend s and associates who want to share his life and his poverty and charity. And the same is true of the young woman, Clare, who embraces the spirit of Francis.

Francis was something of a free spirit, becoming a deacon but never a priest, sometimes preaching effectively, sometimes reticent. At one stage, keen to meet the Muslims, he ventures to meet the leaders. But, it is in his meeting with Pope Innocent III that there is drama, the Pope wary of him, agreeing to consider the church’s approbation of the Franciscan movement, his dream of Francis supporting the collapsing church, and the approval given.

The film also highlights how Francis was not really an institutional man, having difficulties with a friar who wanted to have his own prayer book, castigating him that this was against poverty – but also falling foul of his successor, Brother Leo, who wanted structure and order in the movement.

Not every scene is as successful as the other – and it is interesting as well is distracting to see the same actor turning up in a variety of roles, from Francis’s stern father to a benign friar. And, for the performances, it is not as if many of the people are so much acting but rather, in the manner of a staged play or pageant, they are role-playing, the audience at the talk sometimes visible, and the intercutting of scenes and the talk.

In these days of Pope Francis, there has been more movement towards finding St Francis, discovering and appreciating his spirituality – and this is the kind of documentary-drama that opens up the story of Francis and would be well worth seeing and listening to in anticipation of nurse preparation for watching one of the fuller feature film versions.

OBSERVANCE

Australia, 2015, 90 minutes, Colour.
Lindsey Farris, Stephanie King, Brendan Cowell, Christian Willis, Benedict Hardie.
Directed by Joseph Sims- Dennett.

Observance is a small-budget Australian film featuring Lindsey Farris as something of an anonymous man, Parker, who has been given the job of surveillance of a woman in a building on the other side of the street. The structure of the film is seven days, each day nominated, with the man not having any details about why he was observing the woman but reporting by phone daily to the employer (voiced by Brendan Cowell).

The film opens with enigmatic sequences of sea and cliffs, later going back to fishing on the cliffs and a death – memories and/or dreams.

The young woman, Stephanie King, stays in her flat the whole week although visited by a mysterious man – with touches of violent confrontation.

In the meantime, in the dingy situation, Parker undergoes something of a transformation, physically and mentally, strange dreams and behaviour, the environment taking on sinister tones – until, ultimately, there is a violent confrontation between the man and the woman. Which, perhaps, was the intention of hiring Parker for surveillance.

While the production is Australian, there is a glimpse of American dollars, and all the performers speak with an American twang – a kind of mid-Pacific catering to international audiences that was a feature of a number of Australian films made during the 1970s and 1980s.

1. A small budget drama, surveillance, suspense, mysterious and enigmatic, touches of horror?

2. An Australian production, for an international audience, the accents and American twang, vague locations?

3. The city, the railway and underground, the streets, the lane, the building exteriors, the apartment and the woman’s life, the building for surveillance, dingy? Musical score?

4. The use of the images of the cliff, the sea, fishing, the brother-in-law fishing, dead? Sepia, drained of colour, the insertion into the action? The meaning?

5. The structure of the film, the seven days, each day on screen?

6. The girl, emerging from the station, going home? Her staying in the house for the week? As seen through the telescope? As seen at the window, on the balcony? Her ordinary behaviour? The arrival of the man, their interactions? Touches of violence? Her coming outside, coming into the building, curious?

7. Parker, very little background given, the visit of his brother-in-law, giving him information, his bringing supplies? Parker and his job, it being extended, the payments? The dingy setting, his blocking the windows, the whole for the telescope, the jar with the black contents, the audience seeing the rat? His being wounded, cutting his finger, the word on his back, the showers, his attempt at treatment? The effect of the days, the phone calls and his reporting? His going out, the rubbish bin? The coverings off the windows? The surveillance technology?

8. The cumulative effect of his watching, the effect on himself, his psyche? The significance of his dreams and his imagination?

9. The effect on his mental state, the black, his vomiting? Moving from reality to imagination and back? His going into the house, setting up the bugging, not being able to hear clearly what was being said?

10. The man, on the balcony, on the phone, his threats to Parker? His behaviour with the girl?

11. The build up to the climax, the girl’s rejection of her fiance? Coming to the building, the confrontation with Parker, his bashing her to death?

12. Background to the surveillance, the boss and the phone calls – the story of the businessman and discarding his mistress? His son? The employer setting up Parker – and the killing?

LOLO

France, 2015, 109 minutes, Colour.
Julie Delpy, Dany Boon, Vincent Lacoste, Karin Viard,
Directed by Julie Delpy.

Julie Delpy has had a successful career as an actress and then as a writer and as a director. She works comfortably in France as well as in the United States, having both citizenships. She came to international notice with Richard Linklater’s Before Sunrise as well as in the two sequels.

This is a light-hearted film but with serious undertones.

Julie Delpy portrays a woman whose husband has left her, is successful professionally, but has a son who is emotionally dependent on her, though she does not realise this. On holiday in Biarritz with her friend, played by Karin Viard, she becomes involved with an IT expert who is more than a little on the awkward side, Dany Boon.

They begin a relationship, he moves to Paris with his IT expertise, moves in, encounters the son who seems to be friendly but all the time moves to undermine him and his relationship with his mother. This causes several embarrassing situations and a rift between the two.

There is an eventual showdown after a disaster for the IT presentation but the son has to face up to the reality of his relationship with his mother, taking too literally her saying that he was her greatest love, and having to move out to greater independence – with the couple happily reuniting.

1. A comedy with serious undertones?

2. The career of Julie Delpy, as actress, as writer, as director? Performing all three roles in this film?

3. The settings in Biarritz, the holiday atmosphere, the spa, the hotel? Jean- Rene’s world, IT? Seen as something of a Biarritz bumpkin? The contrast with Paris, the world of fashion, society? The world of IT? Homes and apartments? The apartment with a view of the Eiffel Tower? The scenes in Greece? The musical score, songs?

4. The title, Lolo appearing later in the film, the focus on Violette and Jean- René? The introduction to Lolo, his age, Violette’s son?

5. Violette, her friendship with Ariane? At the spa? Violette and her tension? The conversations about sex, frank and explicit? Relationships? The invitation to the party, meeting with Jean- René and his friend? Jean- René and his cooking the barbecue, Violette’s approach, the attraction, the unlikely pairing, the instant relationship?

6. Violette, her work, at home, past relationships, her husband leaving, the lovers?

7. The portrait of Lolo, age, behaviour, artist and his work? His being at home, the couple falling on the bed, the effect on his ribs? His casual attitudes, living at home, his reaction to Jean- René, ridiculing him, yet being polite to his face? His scrapbook insulting him? His reaction to Jean- René moving in? Comments on his clothes, going shopping, yet setting him up with inappropriate clothes? The itch powder and its effect? Spiking his drink and the erratic behaviour in conversation? Helping him move, his friendship with Lulu, the question of the computer? Violette and Jean Rene setting up the paintings?

8. Violette, her enjoying the relationship with Jean- René? Taking him out, the interaction with Karl Lagerfeld? The selfie? The tensions, moods and up and downs? Her losing faith in him?

9. Jean- René, his skills, his 20 years of work, fearing the loss of the computer? The night before his presentation, the alarm clock, the earplugs, Lolo and the two women, Lolo and his spiel about Jean- René, their going into his bed, his waking up, Violette and her reaction?

10. Jean- René, late, the presentation, the collapse of the system? His aggression towards Lolo? His arrest, the interrogation? His being given 48 hours to repair the damage – and his success?

11. Lolo, his exhibition, his mother believing his every word? Abandoning Jean- René?

12. His mother finding out the truth, his concealing her notes, his scrapbook, the discussions with him, his saying that she had always said he was her greatest love, she saying that is what mothers said, his believing it, getting rid of his father, the lovers, and Jean- René?

13. His mother ordering him out, going to London, the happy reunion?

GIRLS LOST/ POJKARNA

Sweden, 2015, 106 minutes, Colour.
Directed by Alexandra Therese Keining.

Girls Lost is a film about adolescent girls, three bonding strongly together, emotions and affections, and criticised and bullied by the boys at school for being lesbian. The film offers ugly images of arrogant boys, their sexism and their violent and verbal bullying.

The three girls are confident in their friendship, are comfortable together, discover a plant and cultivate it and taste its nectar which moves the film into magical realism. When they drink, they are transformed into male versions of themselves (with female actors as the girls and male actors as their masculine forms). Appearing as male gives the girls a great freedom, acceptance by the boys, moving comfortably amongst them.

It is different for one of the girls, Kim, who is already somewhat comfortable with her male side but appreciates being a boy, appearance, attitudes, that, really, under the female surface she is a boy. She betrays the agreement between the three girls and continues to transform herself, becoming friendly with a boy, Tony, to whom she is attracted and with whom she participates in a robbery. This evokes a reaction from the other two girls, one of whom is generally in love with her.

While the film offers some reconciliation between the three girls, it does end with Kim going off to a future by herself, to find her identity.

1. A film about 14-year-olds? Adolescent situations, developing characters, identity?

2. The Swedish setting, the town, homes, school, sports fields, the woods, gathering places for gangs, robberies? The musical score?

3. The title, the focus on the girls, the focus on boys? The girls becoming boys?

4. The realism, the magic realism, the mysterious plant, cultivation, the nectar, the transformation from girls into boys? The girls behaving as boys?

5. The focus on the girls, their friendship, the abuse and being lesbian, the girls and their affection, together, being bullied by the boys, verbal abuse, physical? The activities at school, the boys blocking the way, the sporting attempts and failures? The girls hanging out together? Parents and family? The plant, cultivation? The leaves, the juice, drinking the juice?

6. The transformation of the three girls into boys? Different actors? Resemblances or not? The three as boys, being accepted as boys? Kim and Tony, the attraction, together? The reaction of Momo and Bella? Intriguing experiences? The return to themselves?

7. The importance for Kim, the initial focus on her being chased in the woods, her boyish appearance, her mother? Her life, at home, at school, the bullying? Lesbian tendencies? Or transgender? Her being comfortable being a boy? Her activities, the friendship with Tony, hanging out with him, the robbery and getting the money for the sale? Her attraction to him, swimming together, expressions of affection? His reaction – and his kissing the girl? The dilemma for Kim, going off by herself, betrayal of the friends, the nectar, Momo and her expression of love for her? The finale, going off – to what future, to what identity?

8. Momo and Bella, 14-year-old girls, sharing the experience with Kim? Momo and the lesbian affection for Kim? The experiences of the girls as boys? Feelings of betrayal by Kim?

9. Tony, friendship with Kim, his activities with the gang, stealing, getting Kim to help, the payment for the stolen goods? Using the girl? Affection for Kim, the swimming – and his reaction?

10. The other boys at school, the heartless bullying and name calling?

11. The teachers, not intervening to help the girls, amazed at Kim’s sports prowess?

12. The role of the parents and teachers – close to their children, not?

DIARY OF A WIMPY KID: DOG DAYS

US, 2012, 94 minutes, Colour.
Zachary Gordon, Devon Bostick, Rachael Harris, Robert Capron, Steve Zahn.
Directed by David Bowers.

Writer and artist Jeff Kinney had great success with his books, Diary of a Wimpy Kid. This is the third film version.

By this stage, fans of the books will have accepted the characters, the comic situations, the problems, the solutions, family reconciliations.

On the other hand, while young audiences may be able to identify with Greg Heffley and the other characters (although Rodrick is still obnoxious and Rowley is very sympathetic), he is still both wimpish and nasty, which means ambiguous reactions to him until the end and the reconciliation with his father – who is played with quite some zest by Steve Zahn.

The books continue in their further plans for other films.


1. The popularity of the books, the sketches and illustrations? The target audience, children, parents?

2. The comedy, spoof – serious underlying values, questions?

3. The American town, the houses, school, parties, the country club and the visits, the swimming pools, tennis? The Sweet Sixteen and the band playing?

4. The music, the rock ‘n roll, the musical score?

5. Greg as the wimpy boy, or not? His capacity for mischief? How different was he from Rodrick? His own vanity, pushing Rowley, focus on Holly and the girls, his reaction to the teachers, lying to his parents, clashes with Rodrick? Ordinary teenager and/or the touch of the nasty?

6. Greg, at home, the summer, wanting to play computer games? At the pool, failure, with his brothers? Friendship with Rowley, going to the country club, Rodrick using him to get in or else reporting him to their parents? The pool, his diving and the little girl criticising? His losing his swimming trunks? Flirtation with the girls? The presumption about tennis, the failure of the game? Rowley and his parents, Rowley lying and ashamed of it? Greg being exposed, at the club, the large bill, his father’s reaction? The wilderness experiences, with his father, the trap for the leader, his confession? Reconciliation with his father?

7. Rodrick, his age, selfish, vain, with his band, tricking Greg, his slovenly manner, eating? Lazy? Using Greg to get into the country club, in the garbage skip? The band, the performance, the mayhem? Any redeeming features?

8. The picture of the parents, the mother, her principles, kind to her children, with each of her children? Her setting up the reading club and Greg’s friends coming? Dad, easygoing, soft, his work, attitude to each of his children? The summer, going to the pool, urging Greg to be active, not to play computer games, Greg deceiving him, saying that he had the job at the country club, dad offering him to work at the office? Getting Greg to be involved in the wilderness exercises? The discovery of the truth about the country club, the huge bill? Not yelling at Greg but saying he was disappointed? The Wilderness exercise, the failures, the boys overhearing the criticism, setting up the trap, Greg confessing, the exposure of the leader of the group and his mod cons? Dad and his supporting of Greg?

9. The baby? At the pool, Greg looking after him? At home?

10. Rowley, Greg and his friendship, sharing with Greg, the magic, his visits, watching the horror film and the fright, his father bringing him home, coming to the party, rescuing Greg, in the basement? Inviting Greg to help him, Greg’s refusal to help with the magic, the concert, Greg relenting, the success?

11. The intended audience, young people and their reaction, identifying or not? Parents watching the film?

SILENCE

US, 2016, 160 minutes, Colour.
Andrew Garfield, Adam Driver, Liam Neeson, Issei Ogata, Yosuke Kubozuka, Tadanobu Asani.
Directed by Martin Scorsese.


Silence is Martin Scorsese’s version of Shiraku Endo’s novel, Silence, which had become an award-winning, Cannes-screened, Japanese film in 1971. Scorsese wanted to make his version for 25 years but, until now, had failed in raising sufficient finance. His film now is a fine Scorsese achievement.

Scorsese is often quoted as stating that he is a Roman Catholic, first and last, and that he has seen his role as film director as akin to that of the priest, incarnating transcendent values in his films.

Scorsese has explored Catholic themes in only two films, Whose Knocking at My Door (1968) about a young Catholic man with problems in New York City. And now, Silence. At a time when so many people have lost interest in religion, questioning it as well as questioning faith in God, the Catholic Church is treated with some scepticism and, because of abuse scandals, priests considered with hostility, it is a surprise to find such a deep exploration of the priest and priesthood in 2016. But, it must be stated that Silence is also a film about Catholic laity.

Of course, Scorsese is very well known for his Jesus film, The Last Temptation of Christ (1988), not a Gospel film as such but an interpretation of the Gospel stories and Jesus’ humanity and divinity according to the novel by Greek Orthodox writer, Nikos Kazantszakis. As regards religion, Scorsese made the fine film about the Dalai Llama, Kundun (1997).

Scorsese was born in 1942 and the Catholicism that he grew up with, an Italianate New York Catholicism of the 1940s and 1950s, has been absorbed by the director. He turned 20 at the time of the first session of the Second Vatican Council but he seems to have moved away from day-by-day Catholicism at this period and his later comments and reflections do not echo the renewal instigated by Vatican 2. In many ways, Scorsese’s Catholicism is a past Catholicism.

This is evident in Silence, in its portrayal of the Jesuit priests, their missionary endeavours, the persecutions, torture and executions. The ethos of martyrdom is that of the period of Scorsese’s childhood and adolescence, a long tradition of heroism in giving up one’s life for the faith, witnessing to faith in suffering and death, reinforced at the time by the Church’s experiences in Eastern Europe, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, and the well-known stories of Cardinal Mindzenty in the 1950s.

In fact, the first two hours of Silence (and it is a long film running for 160 minutes) play as an appeal to the Catholic ethos of the 1940s and 50s. It could take its place alongside such films as the version of A.J.Cronin’s The Keys of the Kingdom (1943) with Gregory Peck as a missionary in China. Martyrdom is based on conviction, courage, identification in suffering and death with the passion of Jesus.

The film opens with some vivid re-creations of the execution of Jesuit priests, observed by fellow-Jesuit Father Ferreira (Liam Neeson) who writes a record of what he has seen and what he has felt. These executions occur in 1633. However, his record is delayed in reaching his Jesuit superiors and, in 1640, two earnest young priests, Father Rodriguez (Andrew Garfield, who excelled in 2016 in Hacksaw Ridge) and Father Garrpe (Adam Driver who excelled in 2016 in Paterson), volunteer to go to Japan to search for Father Ferreira.

What Scorsese presents in the first two hours, echoing Endo’s exploration of faith, is a sympathetic portrait of two earnest priests, their ministry to the Japanese laypeople who have survived persecution, hidden in villages in the vicinity of Nagasaki, who welcome the priests, eager to have mass and the opportunity for confession, and keep the priests hidden. The priests respond earnestly, the screenplay giving them many lines of reflection on their evangelisation, to spread the Gospel teaching, principally a Gospel of love, on their spirituality as Jesuits, the love for the Gospel stories which they quote with further, and the person of Jesus, their prayer.

It will be interesting to hear Jesuit responses to the film – and there have been significant films about 18th-century Jesuit missionary activity in The Mission (1986) with its South American settings and Black Robe (1991) about the missionaries in French-speaking Canada in the 17th century, at the same time as the action of Silence. Jesuit media personality, Father James Martin, appears in the credits as a consultant, other Jesuit’s from Taiwan (where the film was made), including strong SIGNIS presence, Father Jerry Martinson, are listed as well.

The priests, who come from Portugal via Macau, refer to the work done 100 years earlier by St Francis Xavier, refer to the Spiritual Exercises for their discernment in decisions and, the prayer of Father Rodriguez is very strong in his identifying with Jesus in the Gospel sequences, the composition of place recommended by St Ignatius Loyola.

It has been noted that this is a film about laity and the convert men and women are prominent in their living of their faith, sacramental life, support of the priests, and their willingness to suffer for their faith – including a long and harrowing sequence where four men are tortured, crucified at the water’s edge, and partly drowned as the waves and tides sweep over them. “Why are their trials so terrible – and our answers so weak?�. There are other sequences of torture and execution which are powerful reminders of the reality of this suffering (suffering which we can read about and absorb but which can be shocking when presented visually on screen).

So, in 2016, in the first two hours, we have a film which is a new dramatisation of older Catholic styles, Scorsese contributing to a re-awareness of Catholicism.

It is in the final 40 minutes that the film moves its audience, faithful as well as non-Christian, sympathetic or not, to consider questions about priesthood that have arisen since the Vatican Council. The word that is used throughout the screenplay, which we are not used to using in Christian circles now, is ‘apostasy’.

The Japanese authorities, originally sympathetic to the coming of Christianity, but then moving towards persecution, assertion of Buddhist traditions, and pressure on the priests to give up their faith, all Christians being asked symbolically to step, physically, on a religious image or to spit on the crucifix, refusing being “the most painful act of love performed�. These temptations for the priests to give up is a reminder of the key theme of The Last Temptation of Christ, Jesus being asked to come down from the cross and live an ordinary life, the last temptation being the temptation to ordinariness. In this case, for the priests to become Japanese citizens, absorbing Buddhist traditions, studying science and language, with wives and families.

The appeal to the priests is different from that to the peasant Christians: the priests are asked to renounce their faith so that the prisoners might be set free. Father Rodriguez spends a great deal of time in prison, witnessing the torture of the Christians, mental anguish as he prays, the temptation to give in for the sake of the lives of those who are to be killed. He hears the voice of Jesus himself “I know and share your pain, your life is with me now�, sometimes looking at the image of Jesus – at one stage, on the run, looking at his bedraggled reflection in a pool and seeing the face of Jesus. He has his own Gethsemane as the authorities pressurise him and bring in Father Ferreira, who had been Father Rodriguez’s inspiration, but who has made the decision, after torture, to renounce Christianity and the church.

Does the film suggest that the no greater love is not necessarily laying down life in death but in sacrificing one’s own life in living so that others may live?

One of the villagers who brings the priests to Japan, whose family have been executed but who has survived, seeing himself as a Judas (and frequently being a Judas) but who wants to confess and to be forgiven, challenging Father Rodriguez who does give him absolution to wonder how Jesus could love this kind of man.

Since the 1960s, many priests and religious have moved to lay life after years in vows. This is a theme that has preoccupied Catholics for almost half a century in a way that was not so explicit previously. Silence raises the issue of commitment to vocation, challenge to vocation, mental and emotional pressure, the experience of feeling “forsaken� intellectual arguments, and the crisis of conscience of renunciation to save others’ lives. Father Rodriguez uses the language of the “fallen priest�, “lost to God�.

A parenthesis: in the 1955 film based on the trials of Cardinal Mindzenty in Hungary, The Prisoner, the Cardinal is given some lines about what he might say in his trial, that because of the torture, he may sound as if he is denying his faith, something he is truly committed to.
The film does not end as we might have expected and the audience finishes watching Silence silently, reflecting, puzzled, hopeful… Especially with one final image of Father Rodriguez as he dies and his body ceremonially burnt in the 1680s.

Silence is a film of beautiful images on land and seascapes, dark and hidden sequences, and very much a film of words, articulated questions of faith, articulated prayers, and, towards the end, an emphasis on rational argument about religion, faith, comparative religions, the politics of Western powers in the 17th century and the reaction against them by the Japanese, and the challenging discussions about the nature of the faith, the possibility of doubt and the conversion of the Japanese, whether Christianity and Catholicism have actually taken root or are simply an adaptation, with sincere commitment, of long-standing beliefs and traditions. It is asked whether the convert value the signs of faith, metals and pictures, more than faith itself. There are substantial discussions about the nature of truth, its universality, and its being relative in different cultures. There are discussions about transcendence and how this is absent from Japanese culture, using the image of the sun: Jesus, the Son, rising after three days whereas the sun, sacred to the Japanese, rises daily in ordinary life.

Silence is not going to be a big box-office success. Initial reviewers who have commended this exploration of faith and a sense of God and God’s absence remark that the film was often boring – and may well be to the wider audience. In that sense, Scorsese has made the film for himself, a reflection on his own life, his beginnings in faith, his memories of the year he spent in the junior seminary in New York City and the example of the youth minister priest who inspired him, of his moving away from the institutional church, of his life and career, of his deep-seated interest in the basic themes of sin, guilt, repentance, suffering, redemption. There is hope in the screenplay with the laypeople talking about Paradise, hopeful an afterlife, which has to be better than the impoverished and persecuted life they are living here on earth.


1. Endo’s novel? From 1966? The film version in 1971? Martin Scorsese and his long interest, the long years of preparation?

2. Scorsese’s aim, motivations, Catholicism, exploration of priests and priesthood, faith and doubt, suffering, death and redemption? Drawing on the experiences of his own life?

3. The title, silence in general, the silence of God, the silence of Jesus? The silence of the Jesuits? The silence of the secret Christian converts in Japan? The silence at the request of Japanes authorities to deny faith? Space and silence? The minimal score – but the religious music and hymns?

4. A Jesuit film, the advisers, the sense of the Jesuits, their vocation, spirituality, mission? Francis Xavier, Ignatius Loyola, the Spiritual Exercises?

5. A Catholic film, European Catholicism, the 17th century? The European powers, the missionaries and the political background? Preaching, conversion? Faith and piety, sacramental life, reliance on the signs of faith, the gospel of Love?

6. The focus on the love of Jesus, the love of God, the quotations from the gospel, Father Rodriguez identifying with Jesus, with the Gospel sequences and the “composition of place� especially for Gethsemane, the passion and crucifixion?

7. The re-creation of the period, the 17th century, the opening in Portugal, the Jesuits and the church buildings? The opening in Japan, the martyrs? Scenes in Macau and the atmosphere of Asia? Japan, the coast, the woods, the villages, the city, prisons, tribunals? The merchants from Europe?

8. The prologue, the scenes of the crucifixions, the narrative by Father Ferreira, his witness, the letter to the Jesuit superiors? The priests, the boiling water, the holes in the vessel, the crucifixion? Martyrs and faith, the background of the persecutions in Japan?

9. Father Garrpe, Father Rodriguez, earnest young men, the discussions with the superior, pro and con for their going to Japan, the spirit of discernment, the stories about Father Ferreira and believing them or not? The permission to go, to find Father Ferreira, to find the truth? The background of Father Ferreira as mental? The long voyage, Macau, the search for means to get to Japan, the drunken Japanese man, the Chinese help, sailing to Japan, the uncertainty of arrival, on the beach, the Jesuits wary, the welcoming from the villagers?

10. Christians and faith, holding to faith, the older converts and their devotion, leading to their deaths? The drunken Japanese, the facts about his life, the deaths of his family, his own giving in, leaving Japan? The converts and the authorities, the reliance on the signs of faith, celebration of Mass, going to confession, the profound belief in forgiveness? Hiding the priests, in the cellar, their going out into the sun, the effect of the confinement, psychologically and spiritually?

11. Father Garrpe, direct, his fears, with the people, his arrest, witnessing the deaths by drowning, his swimming out to the boat, his being killed?

12. Father Rodriguez, in charge, a fervent and devoted man, his personal relationship with Jesus, in prayer, identifying with him?

13. The Japanese man as a Judas, leading Father Rodriguez on the track, the broken water vessel, Father Rodriguez looking at his face in the pool, seeing the face of Jesus? Betrayed?

14. The treatment of Father Rodriguez, the arrest of the Japanese converts, the authorities, the demand for hostages? The old men? The Judas? The crucifixions, in the sea, the waves overwhelming them? Father Rodriguez and his dilemma, whether they should dissemble to prevent their deaths? His apostasy for their lives?

15. The inquisitor, the nature of the debates, the issues? Father Rodriguez, caged, the physical and mental torture? The discussions with the translator?

16. The transfer, his ambiguous treatment, good and bad, change of clothes, the audiences with the inquisitor, hearing the shouting in the adjacent cell? The psychological effect on him?

17. His expecting Father Ferreira, the disappointment? The Judas character, continually coming back for confession? The woman, prepared to be a martyr, the talk about Paradise – and it’s better than human life, no work, no taxes, no suffering…?

18. Father Ferreira coming, the issue of his apostasy, the fallen priest, lost to God?

19. Ferreira and his life, the torture, his being hang upside down, the cut, the seeping of the blood? His renunciation, issues of faith, science and study, wife and family, the debates with Rodriguez, about the Japanese, not having roots of religion, Japan as a swamp, Japanese culture, Buddhism, the analogy of the resurrection after the third day and the Sun? And the Japanese seeing the sacred sun rising every day?

20. The inquisitor, his attitude towards Christianity, the nationalism of the Europeans, Christianity as relative? The image of the tree, different trees growing in different situations of soil and climate?

21. Ferreira, his torture, the cut, the blood? The Christians hanging, the cuts and the seeping blood?

22. The effect on Father Rodriguez, the pressure on him, the deaths of the Christians, his stepping on the face of Christ?

23. The issue of apostasy, Rodriguez’s life, study, with Ferreira sorting the emblems of Christianity of the Dutch traders?

24. The pressure on Father Rodriguez, the inquisitor, saving his life, the sense of abandonment?

25. The understanding of apostasy, denial of faith or loss of faith?

26. Father Rodriguez’s life, the decades passing, his death in the 1680s, his wife, the ceremonial, his body in the urn, being burnt – but the final glimpse of the image of Jesus in his hand?

KRAMPUS

US, 2014, 88 minutes, Colour.
Adam Scott, Toni Collette, Emjay Anthony, Krista Stadler, David Koechner, Conchata Ferrell.
Directed by Michael Dougherty.

English-speaking children may not heard of Krampus – and, if they see the film, they may not want to hear about him!
This is a Christmas film with more than a touch of horror – and the director worked on Halloween with his film Trick ‘r Treat.

The elderly grandmother in the family comes from Germany, speaks German and knows the legend of Krampus, a spirit who is angry when humans lose the spirit of Christmas and wreaks most mischievous revenge on them.

The centre of the action of the film is a young lad, Max, played by Emjay Anthony, with Adam Scott and Toni Collette as his parents. He writes a letter to Santa, and is later mocked by his most unlikable cousins who turn up with their parents to celebrate Christmas as well. Also present is the cantankerous Aunt Dorothy.

Max’s sister goes in search of her boyfriend but discovers that the town has been blacked out and a house ruined. Her father and uncle then go out in search finding the same as well as the caravan destroyed. Various mischievous characters including a Klown, a Jack-in-the-Box?, gingerbread men all intervening and several of the characters disappearing.

When Max wakes up, it has all been a nightmare – but he finds in his hand an emblem, similar to that of his grandmother, a reminder of the presence of Krampus.

1. A Christmas story – with a difference? Family? The horror?

2. Town and homes, the Christmas atmosphere, the shops and the rushes, the customers and the rights, the ordinary people, unpleasant and greedy? And Santa Claus in the shops?

3. The title, German legends, monsters, the town, the toys and creatures, the attacks and the repercussions? The shadow of St Nicholas?

4. The weather, darkness, night, snow, the monsters and destruction?

5. The nightmare, Max and his sleeping, waking? The importance of the spirit of Christmas? Omi’s emblem, Max finding his at the end?

6. At home, the parents, busy, the Christmas situations? Omi, her stories, talking in German? Max understanding German? The visitors for Christmas, Howard and his wife, the obnoxious children, aunt Dorothy?

7. The children, their ages, the two girls, the boy, the baby, their behaviour, callous and obnoxious? Their mother trying to mediate? Howard and his arrogance, presumptions, talk about guns?

8. The daughter, going to see her boyfriend, going out into the storm, the ruined house, the monsters, pursuit, hiding under the truck?

9. The argument about the gun, Howard and dad coming out, the search, the snow, the ruined house, Howard and his being dragged down, his being saved, the caravan and its being destroyed?

10. Max, writing to Santa, the cousins mocking him, his tearing up his letter?

11. The children, the gross behaviour, the boy being drawn up the chimney?

12. The Clown, the Jack-in-the-Box?, the gingerbread man, and men, coming down the chimney? Taking the boy?

13. Omi, for explanations about Krampus, the spirit of Christmas and its being lost?

14. The power gone, the batteries, the house in darkness?

15. The disappearances, the effect on the parents? On Max?

16. Max, waking, the experience of the nightmare, Christmas hope and preserving the spirit of Christmas? And the future of Krampus?