UNDERWORLD: BLOOD WARS

UK/US, 2016, 91 minutes, Colour.
Kate Beckinsale, Theo James, Lara Pulver, Charles Dance, Tobias Menzies, Bradley James, Daisy Head, James Faulkner.
Directed by Anna Foerster.

This is the fifth film in the cab underworld series, which is lasted well over a decade. It is not a film to make converts – a bit late because there is so much background from the previous films to be absorbed to make sense of this one.

So, it is definitely a film for the fans, just the 90 minutes, not overstaying its welcome, plenty of the same ingredients – but a plotline which is much more direct, less convoluted than before.

Basically, the film lives up to it title, this is a Blood Wars conflict, several rather blood in gory battles, and a climax where it is clear from the film that the vampires are the goodies and the lichens are the baddies – the vampires being, on the whole, very civilised in their way of speaking, their behaviour (though not without their traitors) and the lichens are vicious werewolves who burst out of their human skins to become giant, aggressive beastly dogs.

The heroine of all the films, Kate Beckinsale is Celine, seems to be at peace after the previous episodes, lamenting the death of her lover Michael, regretfully having to leave her daughter, a girl of mixed vampire and lichen blood, who becomes the prey of the Lycan chief who wants to get her blood to become all-powerful.

Speaking of all-powerful, there is a very sultry villain S, semi era, (a seductive Lara Pulver) who wants revenge against Celine, persuades the vampire leader, Thomas (Charles Dance) to get Celine and his son David (Theo James) to come to one of the remaining vampire mansions. Celine is to train the vampire soldiers for conflict against the Lichens.

With all that mention intrigue, Celine and David go north to another vampire mansion in the snow and ice. The lichens have a vampire spy and so attack in the North – with a surprise conquering of Celine by Marius (Tobias Menzies) the Lycan who is seeking domination.

So, back to the original mansion, some era thinking she has the upper hand, only to be confronted by David, betrayed by her lover, but saved, momentarily, by another Lycan attack – and the resurrection of Celine.

Happy ever after? The possibility – but taking the story further is also a possibility…

1. The popularity of the Underworld series? Audiences familiar with the characters, the traditions, the horror styles? Vampires and Lycans? Into the 21st century? Conflicts?

2. Audience familiarity with the folklore about Vampires, the kingdom, at night, the few colonies left in the 21st century? The role of the Lycans, the werewolf tradition, animal and brutal compared with the civilised vampires? The intermingling over the centuries?

3. The Underworld world, its look, dark, the mansions with the vampires, night, the interiors, the north? The gathering of the Lycans? Special effects, action sequences? Musical score?

4. The title, the wars, the personalities, goals – and hopes for peace?

5. Seline, the heroine, her past? Her love for Michael? The birth of the daughter? Growing up, the mixed blood, her being the target of the Lycans to supplement their blood and their power? Seline separating from her daughter, not knowing where she was, to protect her? The role of David, the issue of peace? The Lycan leader and his attack?

6. David and Selene, David and his relationship with his father, Thomas in the tradition of the vampires? The discussions with Semira, her persuading him to talk to the Council, her machinations, manipulations, David and Selene returning? The role of Selene, training the troops? Semirar, wanting vengeance, her lover and his attack on Selene, the killing of the vampire soldiers? The fight, Thomas giving his life, David and Selene escaping?

7. Travelling to the north, the colony, the refuge, the vampires and their welcome? Marius, the attack of the Lycans, in human form, in werewolf form, gigantic? The battle, the deaths? The fight in the ice, Marius and Selene, her going under the ice with the possibility for new life? Her return?

8. David, declaration of his ancestry, the blood, is being accepted as the king? The confrontation with Semira, Semira wanting power, drinking the blood, the vampire in love with Marius, her return with the information, Semira killing her?

9. The final attack, David and his strategy, the fight within the mansion? The Lycans, the brutality? Selene’s return, the final confrontation with Cassius and his death? Semira’s death?

10. The restoration of order, Semira’s lover and his turning against her with loyalty to the Council?

11. David, the restoration, peace in the future?

A UNITED KINGDOM

UK, 2016, 111 minutes, Colour.
David Oyelowo, Rosamund Pike, Jack Davenport, Tom Felton.
Directed by Amma Asante.

No, not the United Kingdom, though its government and colonial officials play a significant role in this story. Rather, this is the story of a kingdom in southern Africa, Bechuanaland, and a crisis, beginning in 1947 that ultimately led to the establishing of the independent country, Botswana.

This is a true story, one that many audiences may not be familiar with at all, but well worth learning about.

Bechuanaland had a centuries-old tradition of a monarchy and succession. At this time, there was a regent, an uncle ruling for his nephew, Seretse Kharma, who was studying in England in preparation for his destiny. Before his return he met a young woman, Ruth Williams, daughter of a salesman, to whom he was attracted, to whom he proposed – and was accepted. Accepted is not exactly the word that describes the reaction of her father nor of the reaction of Seretse’s uncle and the immediate response of the people of Bechuanaland.

Before the marriage, Lord Alastair Canning, governor of southern Africa, confronts Ruth at the office in her typist pool, threatening her that she will bring down the British Empire. She defies him. The couple are married and travel to Seretse’s home country. At the meeting of the tribe, his uncle denounces him, demands that he divorce his wife in order to become ruler.

While, initially, Seretse and Ruth think that they might have underestimated the situation, they stand firm, Seretse making a fine and rousing speech which overcomes some of the opposition from the people and he is accepted, to Lord Canning’s disgust.

The drama continues at a personal level, Ruth spurned by Seretse’s uncle’s wife as well as by his sister – though his sister begins to relent as she sees Ruth becoming part of the community.

But the drama also continues at a political level, the British government demanding that Seretse return to England, suggesting that he take a diplomatic post in the Bahamas for five years and, when he declines, planning to exile him from his home. In the meantime, Ruth gives birth, communicating with her husband by phone. There is a movement in England to support Seretse, even an appeal to Prime Minister Attlee – with the revelation that Britain is concerned about South African support, finances, anti-Communist stances, rather than a small kingdom which is openly defying apartheid.

Winston Churchill does not come out of the story too well, having promised the King’s return were he to be elected in 1948 – but reneging on the promise.

The years in exile in Britain are long, Ruth joining her husband with their daughter, her father being reconciled, but little prospect of returning home.

Some political shrewdness is exercised, especially by the British government, unwarily agreeing that Bechuanaland should have control over any mineral discoveries (while companies from South Africa were digging into Bechuanaland), and it is possible for the couple to return – with information given during the credits of the independence of the country, becoming Botswana in 1966, Seretse, advocating democracy rather than monarchy, as the president and the subsequent history of the country, with photos of the actual protagonists during the credits.

The film was directed by Amma Asante who made the striking film about racial issues in 18th century Britain, Belle. This is one of those very well-made British films, well acted by David Oyelowo as a Seretse Kharma, Rosamund Pike as Ruth Williams and Jack Davenport as Lord Canning - and always interesting at the personal and political levels.

1. A true story? Audiences aware of the history and the personalities? A story of southern Africa, the British Empire, the role of South Africa, the 1940s and 50s?

2. The settings in London, 1947, student life, the boxing ring, typist work, the Society for Mission activity, the dances and socials? The later sequences, the political offices, government, parliament offices? The meetings? The musical score?

3. Authentic locations in Botswana, re-creation of the 1940s, the terrain, mountains, desert, the town, local conditions, the homes, huts, lifestyle, hospital, shops, colonial houses?

4. Seretsi Khama, David Oyelowo and his portrait, the story of his heritage, the long tradition of Kings, his parents’ death, his uncle acting as regent, being trained to be king, studies in London, his return, the history of Bechuanaland and the threats, asking Queen Victoria for protection? Seretsi as a person, the boxing, the dancing, love of jazz, the gifts for Ruth, meeting with Ruth, in love, their walks, talk, sharing, being accosted by the thugs in the street, called a savage? The decision to propose, the proposal scene at the bridge?

5. The contrast with Ruth, British, daughter of a salesman, ordinary home life, going with Muriel to the dance, seeing Seretsi, the interest in jazz, the gifts, the meetings, the dance, the prejudice in the street, her father cutting her off? Her response to his proposal?

6. Sir Alastair Canning, the visit to the typing pool, threats, explanation of the political situation and its implications? Ruth’s stand?

7. The British government and its role in Bechuanaland, Sir Alastair Canning and his governing role, Lancaster as the representative? The conditions for the tribes, the experience of apartheid, Lady Canning, Lancaster and his wife? The conflict? Lancaster and his interventions, the threats? Stones thrown at him? His arrogance and stubbornness?

8. The opening with the uncle writing the letter, Seretri and his return, prepared for hostility, some of the people cheering, the others quiet? The conflict with his uncle? His uncle’s prejudicial stand? Urging the Archbishop of Canterbury and others to investigate? The report, its being kept secret, the British government and its interpretation?

9. Nash, the media, wanting a story, the story of the diamond mines, from South Africa into Bechuanaland, the continued encounters, his getting the information to Seretsi, Seretsi offering him the report and the threat from being made public in the media?

10. Seretsi and Ruth arriving, the glimpses by plane, the car, the uncle, the stage, the uncle wanting him to separate from Ruth, the reactions? The condemnation by the uncle’s wife? Seretsi’s sister? Seretsi’s speech, the appeal against apartheid, the appeal for unity, the people’s reaction, accepting him as chief? Alastair Canning witnessing this, his reaction?

11. Life in Bechunaland, the difficulties, malaria, the mines, Ruth going shopping, the hostility, her sister-in-law helping, beginning bonding?

12. The machinations of the British government, Seretsi having to return to England, the meetings, his being exiled, the offer of the job in Jamaica? His continuing in London? The phone calls?

13. Ruth, the collapse in the street, hospital, the white women offering the South African doctor, her sister-in-law helping, driving to give birth, with the other mothers, her carrying the water, the women praising her, singing the song for her?

14. Phone calls, the British parliamentarians, Anthony Benn, discussions with Attlee, Churchill and his promises, the role of the British government, the dependence on South African gold and diamonds, anti-Communist stances?

15. The years passing, the story of the mines, the meeting in Parliament, the decision to give Bechuanaland control over the resources?

16. Ruth, returning to the UK, her father relenting, the years passing, the various visits, the committee committees, the Parliament, the permission to return for one week, Canning’s disapproval?

17. The return, Canning angry, the meeting with him, the bargaining, the threat of the publishing of the report?

18. Seretsi and his solution, the abolition of royalty, the introduction of democracy, a policy of equality, anti-apartheid? Overcoming reverse prejudice? The discussions with his uncle?

19. The subsequent history, the independence for Bechuanaland, becoming Botswana, Seretsi as the governor? The later authorities?

20. The credits in the photographs of the actual people?

21. An interesting retrospect on the British Empire, colonial interests in Africa, supercilious superiority of the whites, implications of apartheid and reverse prejudices?

QUEEN OF KATWE

Uganda, 2016, 124 minutes, Colour.
Madina Nalwanga, David Oyelowo, Lupita Nyong'o, Martin Kabanza, Taryn Kyazw, Esther Tabanddeke.
Directed by Mira Nair

It is important to realise immediately Katwe is a section of Kampala, capital of Uganda.It is a poor area, a slum area, makeshift homes, drains, much dirt and squalor, people surviving in menial jobs and at local markets. This is the setting for this rather inspirational drama, one of those stories about an unlikely prodigy, a seeming underdog, who trains, experiences conflicts, but succeeds in the area of their prowess.

In this case, it is chess.

The film is based on a true story, opening in 2011 with a chess tournament and going back to 2007 to show the discovery of Phiona and her talent for chess and the training and experiences building up to the tournament. In fact, the film does go on to some succeeding years with Phiona continuing her success – and, in a delightful and very pleasing way, the final credits having the cast of the film stand in front of the camera, one by one, with the actual character that each represented coming to stand beside them.

David Oyelowo (A United Kingdom, Martin Luther King in Selma) plays a sports coach, a former soccer player, who is employed by a ministry that has an outreach for poorer children in sport. He also has a talent for chess and invites a number of children from Katwe to a hall where they can learn to play chess, to use their minds and intelligence, to plan, to be courageous in fighting play, to learn lessons that will carry over into their lives. One day, following her brother, Phiona turns up, is ridiculed by the other students because she stinks, but she stays, defiant, washes at home and returns the next day and learns the basics.

Because of the warmth of the story and David Oyelowo’s playing as the coach, Robert Katende, the film has a very strong spirit. The other contribution, apart from Manding Nalwanga as Phiona, a 10-year-old girl with determination, is that of Lupita Nyong’s as Phiona’s mother, Harriet, a widow with several children, trying to cope by selling fish and corn at the market, a woman trying to manage and exerting strong discipline – although her oldest daughter goes off with one of the locals and, temporally, lives in some luxury.
choose three
The film is directed by Indian director Mira Nair, director of such interesting films as Salaam Bombay, Mississippi Marsala, Monsoon Wedding, who has lived in Uganda for many years and knows her way around the city and capitalises with the use of actual locations.

Robert is able to raise money by playing football for the cash deposit for his group of children to play in an upper class college in Kampala, Phiona shocking the champion by beating him, the locals at home getting a great boost in spirit from her victory. This is something of the pattern that continues for some years, Robert’s sympathetic wife teaching Phiona to read so that she can study chess books, the discovery that she can see in her mind the consequences of a move eight moves ahead. Her chess education includes a triumphant visit to a competition in Sudan and a less favourable competition in Moscow.

At this pre-adolescent age, Phiona is not always able to deal with the consequences of success, seeing how the other half live, looking at her own conditions. But, she takes the matter in hand, supported by Robert and his wife, Robert also able to speak frankly and encouragingly with Phiona’s mother.

Obviously, the film is going to have a happy ending, Phiona is not yet 20 and articles and books have been written about her as the child chess prodigy – and the credit information supplies what has happened to all the characters, reminding audiences that if opportunities arise and are taken, success is possible.

Other chess films of interest include The Search for Bobby Fisher but, a film that parallels the story here, is the New Zealand true story film, The Dark Horse, with Cliff Curtis teaching children to play competitive chess.


1. A true story? An inspiring story? Affirmation, opportunity, strength of character?

2. A story from Uganda, for the Ugandan audience, African audiences, worldwide? The story of the human spirit?

3. The Katwe locations, the slums, the streets, makeshift homes, the poverty, squalor, the markets, smell? The contrast with Robert’s house? The school, the upper-class college, the venues for the national championships, Sudan, Russia? Authentic feel?

4. The musical score, the mood, the range of music?

5. Opening with the climax tournament in 2011, going back to 2007, seeing Fiona over the four years?

6. The introduction, Robert, his work in sports, for the Ministry, his past playing football, injuries, his wanting a job? Training the boys at football? His playing football in order to raise money for the entry into the competition? Marriage, love for his wife, daughter? His work, capacity for relationships? A good man?

7. Fiona and her family, Harriet, a strong woman, hard, the widow with the children, her work, the markets, discipline at home, the daily routines? Her children, the boys, the girls and, especially, Night, older, going off with the boys, the way of life? Fiona as serious? Brian serious?

8. The work of the Pioneers, Robert and the group, their seeing him as a coach, cleaning the hall, the tables, the children playing chess? Fiona curious, following Brian, the children reacting to her smell? Her determination, staying, washing at home, returning? Robert commending her? The young girl explaining the rules of chess? Phiona’s interest, capacity for learning, playing the games, winning – and the reaction of those losing to her? Talent, skills? Robert being alert to her?

9. Robert and the offer of a job, engineering – but his having to wait for the offer? Its coming later, but his involvement in chess? His turning the job down, explaining to his wife, her support of his doing what he did best?

10. Going to the Ministry, the snobbish attitude, the demand for the money to enter the poor children? The bus, going to the college, the impact on the slum children? The scholars, uniforms, manners? Fiona playing the champion and winning, the shock of the students? The medal, acclamation on her return home?

11. The effect on Fiona, learning to read, Robert’s wife teaching her? Her capacity for working out eight moves ahead? Home, pressures, the jobs? Her going to Sudan, the plane ride, the tournament, her winning, and further acclamation on her return?

12. Harriet, her strong stances, not understanding, her anger with Night, the experience of the floods? Night offering her money, her pride, Fiona making her accept? Fiona, reading at night, the expense of the paraffin? Her mother using the money to buy more paraffin and encouraging Fiona to read?

13. Brian, the accident, Fiona paying the man on the bike, the hospital, the sowing of stitches without anaesthetic? Harriet organising the escape, no payment? The woman demanding payment and evicting the family? The family wandering, looking for shelter?

14. The helpers getting the house, more space, Night and the revelation of her pregnancy?

15. The years passing, Fiona learning, playing, improving? But also becoming arrogant, the touch of envy for the high life that she had experienced?

16. Going to Russia, her losing, her reaction, sobbing? Robert and his apprehension, encouraging her? Robert and his philosophy of life? His telling Fiona his story, the absence of his mother, meeting her again at six, her death, wanting to give up but not giving up, opportunities?

17. Fiona, her decision to move out, the explanation to Robert, Robert and his wife allowing her to stay? Going to school, the uniform, classes, Brian also at school?

18. Robert, talking with Harriet, the explanations? Fiona visiting her mother at the market, the embrace?

19. The local support for Fiona, 2011, the tournament, everyone in the audience, including Harriet? The children understanding chess as they watched? Her opponent, tricking her, the victory?

20. The return, joy in Katwe? Taking Harriet to the new home, the comfort?

21. The credits, the song about the spice? The actors and their standing next to each of the characters they represented? The reality of the story on screen?

22. The perennial ingredients of sport and talent, underdog, overcoming difficulties – but always a strong spirit?

MONSIEUR MAYONNAISE

Australia, 2016, 88 minutes, Colour.
Philippe Mora.
Directed by Trevor Graham.

Obviously, some Gallic touches with a title like this – and some sequences on the making of mayonnaise, on the variety of ingredients, that may startle some with cooking interests.

However, this is an excellent documentary, always interesting and entertaining, a strong 90 minute episode along the lines of “Where do you come from…?�. The you in this particular case is Australian director and artist, Philippe Mora.

While the film is about his parents and their extraordinary story, especially during World War II, the film was also a revelation about Philippe himself and his very interesting career.

As a framework for the film, Philippe Mora is drawing panels for a comic book, one of his specialties, on the background, history and exploits of his parents, Georges and Mirka. We see the artist at work, the details of his painting so many panels (even to various daubs of mayonnaise). He also uses the device of having himself sit at a desk, rather in the dark, private eye hat, American accent, typing the story for a film noir which is how he sees much of his parents’ lives.

At the opening, there are home movies of the Moras on the beach at Aspendale. The family moved to Melbourne in 1951. It was assumed that Georges was French and it was only much later that it emerged that his real name was Gunter, that he was from Leipzig, that he was studying at the University, medicine, but escaped in 1933 from Hitler’s Germany to Paris where he lived the rest of the 30s, changed his name and identity in occupied France, escaped to the South and spent a great deal of his energy in aiding Jewish children to get out of France, working much of the time in collaboration with Marcel Marceau (even to their disguising themselves as nuns getting children to the Swiss border), who is Philippe Mora’s godfather. (Georges refused to speak German until towards the end of his life).

Mirka was younger, she and her sisters rounded up in 1942 but able to escape and taken in by a family and hidden in a French village until the liberation of France in 1944. With the emerging of the Cold War after 1947, Mirka decided that she did not want to live in Europe with the threat of war and so the couple moved to Australia where they raised their children, Mirka becoming a celebrity in the art world with her painting, her more than touches of bohemian behaviour, with Georges and Mirka opening a gallery, encouraging artists, and then moving into their celebrated restaurants. They separated in 1970. Georges remarried but died in the 1980s while, at the making of the film, Mirka was a vivacious 88, still painting and cooking.

There are plenty of home movies and clips, of scenes from films, including Philippe Mora’s portrait of the Third Reich, Swastika, interviews including a daughter of the French family who sheltered Mirka and her sisters, an American psychiatrist who is one of the children saved by Georges.

Philippe is a constant presence throughout the film, with some comments by his brother William. Audiences, perhaps not familiar with the fact that Philippe made several horror films including two of the Howling movies, will be more than startled when the film suddenly shows some horror and gore clips!

The film moves at a lively pace, is always interesting – and introducing some new aspect of the life of the Moras.

1. A Where do you come from story? Audience interest? History? Exploration of characters?

2. The range of settings, Hollywood, Leipzig, Paris and France, the countryside, southern France and the Swiss border? Melbourne over the decades? The visits to places for interviews, Philadelphia?

3. The editing, interviews, talking heads, home movie clips, movie clips, pictures…? Inserted into the film?

4. Philippe Mora, his search about his parents, and himself, his career, as a filmmaker, artist, documentaries, horror films? His creation of comics? His illustrating his comic style, the paints, the shapes and sizes, his comments? The end and the completion of the book?

5. The transition to Mirka Mora, 88, spacious, her memories, her art in Melbourne, her life in Melbourne, with Georges, with her sons? Her bohemian behaviour and attitudes? Cooking – and the mayonnaise?

6. Georges and his history, Gunter and his parents, Jewish background, in Germany, at the University, studying medicine, leaving Germany in 1933, going to Paris, his life there, the experience of the war and occupation, changing his identity, the organisation for the children, going to the south, helping the children to escape, the stories of Marcel Marceau and Georges and the Swiss border? Philippe and his visit to Henry Parens and his gratitude towards Georges?

7. Mirka’s story, her family, the many girls, in France, rounded up, the escape, the shelter by the Fournier family, for over two years? Part of the family? Philippe’s visit to Gisele, the pictures, her memories, not having seen Mirka again?

8. Jewish history, Germany, the rise of Hitler, the reality, the clips from Swastika – and the comment about the reaction at the Cannes Film Festival? The occupation of France, Hitler in Paris? The rounding up of children, their freedom? The concentration camps? The device of putting mayonnaise on documents and the German soldiers not wanting to get this on their gloves, not examining the documents?

9. The move to Australia, Aspendale Beach, home, the movies, the impression of each of the parents from the movies? Mirka not wanting World War three and so leaving Europe? Her art, painting, Georges and Mirka and the setting up of the gallery? The different restaurants and the reputation? Centre of this afterlife? The children and bringing them up?

10. The excerpts from Philippe Mora’s films, the horror touches with the Howling? The reasons for his interest in horror films?

11. The background of Marcel Marceau, his work during the war, the friendship with Georges, godfather to Philippe?

12. The success of the film as portrait of a family and of Philippe Mora himself?

PATERSON

US, 2015, 113 minutes, Colour.
Adam Driver, Goldshifteh Farhani, Barry Shabaka Henley,
Directed by Jim Jarmusch.

Most of us have never spent a day in Paterson, New Jersey, let alone a week. This film offers the occasion to make up for this never-had opportunity. This is precisely the framework of the film, seven days in Paterson.

Yes, there is quite an amount of routine, day by day, but this does not make it any the less interesting and entertaining. Actually, as the week goes on, we look forward to what each day will bring, anything new, variations on the old.

Patterson is also the name of the central character, a local bus driver, played at his best by Adam Driver. (He won the Best Actor award from the Los Angeles Critics.) He is a very good man, loyal to his work, engaged in the route his bus takes as well as the variety of passengers that he picks up and lets off. And, there are his colleagues at work, especially one pessimistic one whose domestic woes he listens to.

At home, there is his wife, who loves him, who sees him off and then she gets involved in a variety of activities at home, curtains, baking – and all with an emphasis, a high emphasis, on black and white, various designs, the contrast… She is played by Goldshifteh Farahani.

And Paterson has a dog, an English bulldog that he takes for its walk every night – or the dog takes him often enough. It is along the same streets, always ending up at the local pub for a drink, a chat, talk with the bartender, ward off the flirtatious drinker – and, later in the week, a disturbance by a man with a gun, with Paterson able to control him and be hailed as the local street hero.

However, what has not been mentioned yet is one of the most important things about him – he is a poet. He loves writing poetry. We might think that some of it is fairly mundane, but he takes opportunities in his spare moments, sitting at the wheel of the bus before he goes en route, at home, at his desk – and he has one special admiring fan, his wife.

One of the anguishing episodes of the film is his losing all his work because of his dog – but, he does lament for a bit, but is a hopeful man, encounters a little girl who has written a poem about a waterfall, encounters a Japanese poet – and is encouraged to begin again.

And that is what the end of the film does, each day has been captioned and, after the episodes of the weekend and the loss of the poems as well as the encounters, the title comes up on the screen: Monday.

This has to be one of the nicest, in the best sense of the word, films of the year that should have a wide appeal (except perhaps for too impatient diehard action fans!).

1. Paterson the character, Paterson the city? A New Jersey character? His story, a story of the city?

2. The city of Paterson, Main Street, the suburban streets, homes, shops, the bus route, Paterson’s daily walk? The bar? Interiors? The waterfall? An audience visit to the city of Paterson, experiencing it, knowing it? The musical score?

3. The importance of poetry, poems written by an ordinary man, poetry in verse? His experience, love of poetry, love of writing, the joy in his problems, the seemingly mundane subjects and yet his personal investment in them? Writing at home, his room, the desk, writing before taking the bus out, writing at the waterfall? His wife, her appreciation, wanting him to copy them? His notebook? The encounter with the young girl, her poem, Waterfall? The dog destroying his notebook, the experience of the loss of the book, his wife’s comfort? Meeting with a Japanese man? Creating again?

4. The structure of the film: the seven days of the week, going through the week, ending on Monday again? The ritual of waking, in bed with his wife, the two, looking at his watch, the consistency of the time of getting up, kissing his wife, the breakfast cereal? His rituals, route, walking to work, the bus station, the vignettes of the day, the range of characters, the same different? The fadeout scenes and close-ups for each day of the week?

5. The audience getting to know Paterson, his wife, the people in the bar, Marie and Everett, Doc and his wife? The dramas of life, especially in the bar?

6. The focus on Marvin, the bulldog, appearance, walks, growling sounds, sitting and staying, in the armchair, the run of the house, food, the savage reaction in destroying the notebook? The consequences?

7. The pessimist co-worker at the bus station? The range of passengers, Paterson listening, the conversations, the anarchists and their discussion, ordinary people, types, people getting on and off, the boys and the talk? The breakdown, the group on the footpath, reactions?

8. Paterson’s wife, a focus on black and white, the, the curtains, dresses, the icing on the cupcakes? Paterson’s response to his wife, endearing, enduring? Their urging him to photocopy the poems and his delaying to the weekend? The Brussels sprouts and cheddar pie and his drinking the water? Being at home all day, diligent? The cakes for the farmers’ market, sales, her taking her husband out on the town, dinner and the film, the horror touch in the past, the highlife? Her wanting the guitar, the cost, ordering it, the conversations about it, her learning to play, singing?

9. Paterson and his walk every night, with Marvin, going to the bar, the dog sitting or staying? Doc and his stories? Paterson, the beers? Marie, chatting, Everett and his reaction, the reference to Romeo and Juliet, Everett and acting, his declaration of love, Marie not interested, producing the gun, Paterson’s heroics, the toy gun? Doc and the complaints of his wife and her demands? Paterson meeting Everett in the street, friendly conversation? The other customers? The men in the car passing by and asking whether Marvin was a English bulldog?

10. Paterson’s meeting the little girl, her poetry?

11. Paterson after the loss of his poems, going to the falls, sitting and watching, the Japanese tourist, his poems, Japanese, Paterson denying that he was a poet, the Japanese man and his notebook, the gift of the empty book – and for Paterson to start again?

12. An audience appreciating being in Paterson, getting to know Paterson and his wife, and Monday morning again?

FRANCESCO, EL PADRE JORGE

Argentina, 2015, 104 minutes, Colour.
Dario Grandinetti, Sylvia Abascal.
Directed by Beda Docampo Feijoo.

With the popularity of Pope Francis very high all around the world, it was inevitable that there would be many film and television programs based on his life and his ministry.

This biography comes from Argentina, the country very proud of its Pope.

Most people had never heard of Cardinal Bergoglio prior to his election as Pope Francis in 2013, although he was listed as one of the possible popes at the conclave in 2005. There was talk about his way of life in Buenos Aires, working and being with the poor and, it was noted strongly at the time, that he travelled on public transport. But, in 2005 he went back to his Archdiocese.

This film offers viewers the advantage of understanding something of Jorge Bergoglio, gives background, his being a Jesuit, his work as a priest, as a bishop, as the Cardinal Archbishop of Buenos Aires. But, the film does this in a somewhat fragmentary way, moving from different times and different places to others, the dates and places up there on the screen to help the audience appreciate when and where.

By the end of the film, the audience has seen a great deal, even if the sequences are epsiodic, of the life of Jorge Bergoglio. The film highlights his grandparents coming from Italy to Argentina, his decision to enter the seminary and the protestations against this by his mother. His friends seem momentarily sceptical but then support him. On the human level, there is a sequence where he attends a wedding and is attracted to a young woman who is there, dances a tango with her at the reception, gives her a gift of a book and she gift of poems for him – but he never sees her again.

Not so much is made initially of his decision to become a Jesuit or of his Jesuit training but, later in the film, he quotes St Ignatius Loyola and the Spiritual Exerises quite a number of times.

There are many scenes of the priest and the bishop in ministry, comfortably mixing with everyone, conversations in the street, sharing meals, supervising at a school, concerned about drug problems, encouraging the clergy to minister to the poor as he does. The film does give a credible sketch of Jorge Bergoglio, always wanting people to call him simply Father Jorge, even as a bishop. This sketch of his ministry includes the issue of his support or non-support of fellow Jesuits tortured at the time of the Generals, an interview seeing him pleading for the priests. There is also a sequence with a politician who asks him to tone down his utterances and concern for the poor.

One framework for this film is a focus on a fictitious journalist (based on a journalist who did write his biography).who was sent to cover the 2005 conclave for her paper, meets Cardinal Bergoglio who gives her personal advice about her pregnancy, who continues the friendship (even to the baptising of her daughter even though she is an agnostic) and the death of her mother (and, actually, a scene with the Cardinal helping the daughter scatter the ashes in a river).

The actor playing Cardinal Bergoglio is the Argentinian Dario Grandinetti. He is an imposing figure, despite his continued limp, bringing to life the man who was to be Pope. However, the limitation in his performance is that he seems to be ultra-serious, not displaying an immediate charism, rarely smiling – and this proves quite a contrast when the film includes the actual Pope Francis at the end, a much warmer, smiling, embracing character than what we have seen.

The film does incorporate a lot of the words of the future Pope Francis about simplicity of life, on the role of a bishop, not seeking preferment, and, in a scene where he gives an address to the Cardinals in 2013, a reference to evangelisation in “going to the existential peripheries� of the world.

There have been several documentaries, course, about Pope Francis including an Italian film, Chiamatemi Francesco/ Call Me Francis. Youtube indicates that this Italian film as well as the Argentinian film are due to be available on January 7, 2017.

1. The reputation and popularity of Pope Francis? His impact? Audience interest in him and his life, Catholic? Non-Catholic?

2. A film from Argentina, admiration for the Pope, his place in Argentinian history, social life and work? Pride in the Pope?

3. Buenos Aires, its past, the boyhood of the Pope, years in the seminary, attending the wedding, his work as a priest, sacramental, preaching, social, problems? The military? The politicians? The Archbishop and his work, the school, drug problems, clergy? The status of the church?

4. Rome, 2005, the conclave, the Sistine Chapel? The return in 2013, the journalists and their discussions, restaurants? The conclave, the election? The musical score?

5. The final insertion of sequences of Pope Francis himself, his impact, the new era of the papacy?

6. Dario Grandinetti as Pope Francis, serious, not particularly charismatic in himself or his communication? Rarely smiling? The contrast with the added footage of Pope Francis himself, with people, smiling, embracing, charismatic?

7. The structure of the film, the movements throughout different times, glimpses, dates and places on screen? Familiar sequences, unfamiliar, snippets? The cumulative effect?

8. Jorge Bergoglio as young, from an Italian family, his grandparents, his relationship with his mother, her adamant stance against his vocation? His decision, the discussions with his friends, their initial laughter, their support? The St Francis book? Years in the seminary, spirituality? Attending the wedding, attracted to the young woman, dancing the tango, exchanging poems and novels? His ordination and his mother asking his blessing?

9. The outline of his ministry, always been known as Father Jorge, a Jesuit and his frequent quotations from St Ignatius Loyola, at the school, his relationship with the kids, the staff, his ability to mix, humane, a man who hugged and touched, shared grief? The issue of the generals and the torture of the Jesuits, the criticisms, the journalist and her investigations, his interviews, the reaction of the priests themselves about his getting them out of the country? The political interview, the politician asking for moderation? His ecclesiastical status, as a cardinal? His use of public transport, people admiring him, stopping him for conversation, his masses, his sermons, the focus on Jesus as inspiration?

10. Ana, the framework of the film, her getting to know the Archbishop, the discussions, her covering the conclaves, personal, issues, her writing? A fictional representation of the actual author of his biography? In herself, going to Rome, her partner, the issue of abortion, her pregnancy, her discussions with the cardinal, his supporting her having the child? The discussion about candidates, the election of Cardinal Ratzinger? The years passing, the birth of her child, her mother coming from Spain, the background of the tango, present at the baptism? The meals discussions? Her death, cremation, the Ashes in the river with the wreath? The range of meetings, ideas, discussions?

11. The 2013 conclave, the Cardinal’s address to the conclave participants, his urging people to be out in the peripheries? The influence of his talk? Candidacy at the previous election? Discussion about numbers of votes? His being elected? His friendship with the Cardinals, greeting them, discussing the medical situation with the other cardinal?

12. The election, his acceptance, wanting his own shoes, the garb, his greeting people, the people of Rome? In the aftermath and the personal touch with his phone calls?

13. The film as helpful in giving a background to the life and work of Cardinal Bergoglio?

INTO THE BLUE

US, 2005, 110 minutes, Colour.
Paul Walker, Jessica Alba, Scott Caan, Ashley Scott, Josh Brolin, James Frain.
Directed by John Stockwell.

In the 1950s, a popular genre of action films was that of the deep sea diving thriller, with titles like Beneath the Twelve Mile Reef. Here is a contemporary version of this genre with popular star, Paul Walker (The Skulls, The Fast and the Furious) instead of Robert Wagner. Jessica Alba is the principled heroine and Scott Caan, the friend with selfish motives and slippery moral judgements about salvaged goods. The temptation for him is that the treasure is a huge cache of drugs. Director is former action actor, John Stockwell (Blue Crush).

There is lots of underwater photography as the young cast scour the waters for a Civil War ship and as they deal with the drugs. The sleazy villain is British actor, James Frain, but there is also an American villain (who outsmarts the British) played by James Brolin.

There is very little one can say about this kind of film. It aims at its younger niche market. It features personable and attractive (looking) stars. It does, however, take on a moral tone to show that greed and money are not everything and that we can be satisfied with self-respect and love. And who can quarrel with that – even if they do ultimately become millionaires because of their honesty!

1. Popular story for young viewers? The Bahamas? Diving, wrecks, underwater photography? Some melodrama and romance?

2. The Bahamas settings, the island,, the boats, at sea, underwater, the plane and its crash, the pirate ship and the salvage? The musical score?

3. Familiar ingredients for this kind film? Strong hero with integrity? Glamorous girlfriend with integrity? Callow friend, self-seeking and amoral? Glamorous girlfriend? Colombian drug traffickers? American partners? Local help?

4. Gerald, his work, pushing the man overboard, being fired, want to go out on his own? Sam, who work with the fish? Girlfriend? Glamour? Their work together, hopes? Bryce coming, is lawyer background, defending criminals, not revealing he was broke? Amanda, the glamour token? Out on the water, diving?

5. The possibility of the discovery of the pirate ship, regulations, notification? Sam and her strong stance?

6. The discovery of the drug plane, and with the drugs, Jared and Sam and their opposition? Bryce, his plans, saying everything was simple?

7. Bates, his boat, his work? His men? The local authorities in his pocket? Collaboration with Colombians? His killing the Colombians? Wanting the information from Jared, holding Sam?

8. Bryce and Amanda, getting the drugs? Amanda and the attack, her death in hospital?

9. Bryce, callow, trying to make things right? With Jared and the destruction of the drugs?

10. The discussions about the pirate ship, the background, the relics? Bryce offering them to Bates?

11. Jared, is planned, wanting $30,000 from Bates? Is going into the water, the destruction of the drugs? Bates, diving in his pursuit? The underwater fight, exploding the ship?

12. Later, finding the pirate ship, but Jared and Sam satisfied with their integrity and with one another?

THE MENKOFF METHOD

Australia, 2016, 87 minutes, Colour.
Noah Taylor, Lachlan Woods, Jessica Clarke, Robert Taylor, Catherine Mc Clements, Andrew Ryan, Mal Kennard, Olga Makeeva, David Whitely, .
Directed by David Parker.

The title does not give very much away except for the overtones of something Russian with the name, Menkoff. But, who is he and what is his method?

First, this is an unusual Australian film, Melbourne film – and, more’s the pity that its marketing budget was minuscule so that many people who might have enjoyed it did not get the opportunity to know about it and see it.

The filmmakers have had some great brainwaves. They have taken a banking story, a bank in decline, needing some kind of renovation in its management, with machinating underlings and the standing down of the CEO, a ruthless takeover bid and its consequences. But, the makers also have a love for Manga stories, the Japanese graphic novels, vivid cartoon panels, action heroes and heroines, dastardly villains, and intrigues, and with plenty of touches of super-heroics.

And, they have combined the two strands, blending the two stories very nicely, often unexpectedly.

The central character is a bespectacled nerd, David, looking very much like Clark Kent, who is a data processor for the endangered bank, but spending most of his time at work finishing his Manga book for a competition in Japan. His heroine is called Foxy Chaos and, to his surprise, when he goes to a club with his workmate Gary who fancies himself as a singer but even gets kicked out from his karaoke performance, David sees Ruby in the costume of as Foxy Chaos – and, as she hurries away, she loses one of her shoes!

Back to the title. Max Menkoff is a Russian, already pursued by armed killers from Mongolia where he had attempted a bank takeover, who goes to Dubai to tempt an executive for a takeover – and take over he does. He is accompanied by Svetlana, tough and hardy Russian, and Karpov who is tough but somewhat distracted. Max is played intensely by Noah Taylor, creased face, scruffy beard, broken Russian accent – and capitalising on his experience during the times of the Soviet Union in turning workers into loyal robots for the company.

Lachlan Woods and Jessica Clarke as David and Ruby make quite a couple, he gawkiness personified despite his Manga skills, she an attractive ally. And there are various Australian character actors there in supporting roles including Catherine Mc Clements as the straitladed supervisor, Robert Taylor as the CEO and John Brompton as a security man.

It is hoped that this review/description captures a bit of interest so that it sounds tantalising and that this offbeat film might sound worth checking out. A small film, but quite amusing in its way.

The film was directed by David Parker, cinematographer, especially for his partner, Nadia Tass.

1. An entertainment? Imaginative? The target audience – those enthusiastic about Manga, comic books, graphic novels…?

2. An Australian production, ideas, the city of Melbourne, the streets, the bank, shops for comics, the interiors of the bank? The cast?

3. The idea: a story of banks, their failures, poor management, ambitious executives, meetings, international connections in Dubai? Bank takeovers? The role of the Russians, the parody of the Soviet Union, turning people into robots? Deals, finance, insurance policies? The planned destruction? And the parallel to the collapse of the Soviet Union?

4. The importance of Manga in Japan, popularity, the types of characters, Foxy Chaos and her work, activities, peace and harmony in the universe? The visuals, the drawing, cartoon style, vivid, colourful? The insertion of drawings and animated action into the film? Heroes and villains? Foxy? The dark powers and the influence? The insertion of the dog? David and his comic books and the stories?

5. The interconnection between the two diverse themes – and the effect on the audience?

6. David, waking, the nerd, his mask, his life and his being gawky, going to work, continuing his drawings, wanting to enter the competition? Gary and his distractions? The
admiration for the girl and giving him the biscuits? The interlude with Trevor, mad, wanting his desk back, the gun, David offering him the biscuits, his being taken, David as hero, Marjorie and the request for Japanese pens? Going with Gary to the club, seeing Ruby, the attraction? Gary, singing and booted out? Ruby in the costume of Foxy, losing her shoe – and the touch of Cinderella? David going to her house, returning the shoe, the attack by Jason and the dog – and David later learning that Jason was her brother?

7. Max Menkoff, Noah Taylor, his look, face and scars, beard, his accent? The swindle in Mongolia, the Mongolians pursuing, the attack in Dubai? His wanted to take over the bank, the plan for control, spiking the water coolers, everybody injected, turning into robots, their marching, the drills, the songs, the loyalty to the firm? Marching to work, at their desks? Exaggeratedly entertaining?

8. Guy, wanting power, the clash with the boss, the board meetings, the boss being ousted? Guy coming in as the boss? Max and the interview in Dubai, the Power Point, the plan? The CEO and his being exiled, the severity of the chairman of the board? Max, the nature of his control, his decisions?

9. David and Marjorie, Marjorie and her work, everything in order, her being fired, her demanding consent for the injection, her love for her dog, the interview with David, the confrontation with Karpov?

10. David, hiding, the shootout, Marjorie’s death? The Mongolian attack? David taking the dog, feeding it? Pretending to be robotic? With Ruby? Her visit to the boss, his not
wanting to be seen with her?

11. David and the codes, Ruby wanting his help, going to Gary’s computer, the confidential information? Ruby and David going to see the boss, his agreeing to collaborate?

12. Svetlana, her role as assistant, hard, gleeful in control, her torturing David, the irony of her being electrocuted?

13. Karpov, henchmen, his interest in the comic, the ending, his shooting, seeing the dog as a spy, the irony of his being run over?

14. The CEO, disguised as a worker, to get the antidote, in the safe and security, the men, taking the van, running over Karpov, David using Max’s voice to get the workers out of danger? Max, the protective suit, wanting to poison the system? His ordering the workers back in? Overcoming Ruby and injecting her?

15. The buildup to the fight, the antidote, Ruby back to normal, her martial arts skills, with Max? The Mongolian attack? The falling on to the lift, David and Ruby going down, Max and the Mongolian falling?

16. Everybody restored, David and Ruby kissing, going to Japan, the Manga master and his acceptance of the book, the happy ending?

NOCTURNAL ANIMALS

US, 2016, 117 minutes, Colour.
Amy Adams, Jake Gyllenhaal, Michael Shannon, Aaron Taylor- Johnson, Isla Fisher, Ellie Bamber, Armie Hammer, Karl Glusman, Robert Aramayo, Laura Linney, Andrea Reisborough, Michael Sheen.
Directed by Tom Ford.

This is a different kind of drama/ melodrama, two stories intersecting throughout the film.

(It is true that some audiences thought this was a nature film, an error something akin 50 years ago to people thinking that Midnight Cowboy was a Western!)

The film has an arresting, if disturbing, credit sequence, with a number of large portraits of calypagous women, many of rather vast proportions, naked, perhaps suggesting to audiences that this is what the title meant. But it leads into the character of Susan, played by Amy Adams, who is a gallery curator and this is one of her exhibitions. She is a tense woman, with insomnia, concerned about her husband (Armie Hammer) who seems to be away on business a great deal. She receives a package, the manuscript of a novel by her former husband and she begins to read. And the audience begins to see the dramatisation of this novel – which is called Nocturnal Animals.

We later learn that Susan and Edward, the author of the novel, shared interests and love earlier but Edward was a soft man and Susan are hard woman, especially in the vein of her snobbish mother (Laura Linney in a very effective cameo role) and the two parted.

One of the features that makes the film dramatically arresting is that Jake Gyllenhaal plays Edward in the flashbacks but also plays Tony, the husband in the novel. the performances consolidate his status as a strong actor.Truth be told, at least for some audiences, the dramatisation of the novel is far more interesting than Susan’s sleepless nights and her personal dilemmas.

The novel and the film takes us on to the back roads of Texas, a family going on vacation, father, mother (Isla Blair) and daughter (Ellie Bamber). They are minding their own business, the daughter, of course, preoccupied with social media. A car ahead on this open highway begins to play chicken games, slowing down, speeding up, but it all becomes worse when the petulant girl gives the driver of the car the finger – and what consequences for the simple giving the finger!

As we stay with Susan, sharing her memories, her relationship with Edward, with her mother, we keep hoping that she will pick up the manuscript again and continue reading. But, things become worse, the louts in the car, led by very surly and arrogant Aaron Taylor- Johnson, attack the family, abducting the wife and daughter, abandoning the father. We wonder whether the worst can happen – and most of it does.

As the novel continues, we are introduced to a local detective, played very effectively by Michael Shannon in his typically menacing Michael Shannon style. He is after the criminals, enlists the help of Tony to identify them, is on the lookout for their further misdemeanours, which brings up an even more dramatic climax, complicated by the physical condition of the detective who, because he has the cancer already, doesn’t have to give up his cigarettes.

While the novel within the film does have an ending, the film itself does not, Susan still having to make decisions about her life. Interestingly, the original novel is actually titled Tony and Susan. The parallels between Edward and Tony are worth considering.

The film is directed by fashion designer Tom Ford, is only of the film was another striking drama, A Single Man, with Colin Firth.

1. The title? Of this film? Of the novel within the film? Meaning? The original novel called Tony and Susan?

2. An LA story, a Texas story? Art world and the gallery, offices? Affluent homes? Texas, homes, college? The novel visualised, West Texas, the vast roads, the desert, night, cars on the highway, Huts and locations? Police precincts? The musical score?

3. The director, his career as a fashion designer, interest in art? The visuals of the film – the colours and vistas of clouds and sky? The credits, the women, the niches and displays, the Art Gallery?

4. Susan story: the credits, her work at the gallery, the staff and board at the gallery, the types at the social? The home? Hutton and his attitude? His going to New York, no phone call, floor 31, Susan’s suspicions? Susan, her friends, the friend with the psychic advice, her gay husband? The party? Susan alone at home, the servants, unable to sleep, the package with the novel, her reading it?

5. Edward, his novel, the dedication to Susan? The flashbacks? His writing, her art studies, meeting in New York, the dinner? Susan’s mother, her dominance in warning her? That Edward was weak? Susan’s counter that he was sensitive? The issue of her gay brother and her mother’s silence? Edward, his writing, focusing on himself, Susan’s reaction, urging him to go beyond, the attraction to Hutton, Susan leaving Edward? His comment that she was like her mother? Her feelings of guilt about leaving Edward? Her reading the novel, the story of the attack on the daughter – and her phone call to get reassurance?

6. Susan at the board meetings, issues of hire and fire, the other members of the staff, their style, fashion? The effect of reading the novel, at home, the bath, the rain? Edward’s email, the plan, her presence, drinking, his not showing up? Her being left with her regrets?

7. The film bringing the novel alive, the car, the family, relationships, the daughter and her texting? The night, the cars blocking the way, the daughter giving the finger and its consequences? The brutal story? The men, pursuit, forcing Tony off the road, the leader, arrogant and sexist? The confrontation? Tony and his reaction, backing down? The daughter and her aggression, her mother’s concern? The police passing by? The sense of menace? The men changing the tire, forcing the wife and daughter into the car, Tony travelling with Lou?

8. The audience identifying with the characters, the situations, the fear? Effect on Susan reading these pages, the return to seeing her at home, her reactions? Jake Gyllenhaal as both Edward and Tony, the different characters? The similarities? Susan’s relationship to Edward? Her response to the Tony of the novel? The sensitive father, suffering, anguish, bewilderment, hiding from the pursuers? Wanting vengeance?

9. Tony abandoned, his walking, the car returning and calling for him, his hiding, people passing on the highway, the police?

10. Bobby, Michael Shannon and his style, his work as a policeman, detective? His interviewing Tony? Retracing the steps, finding the bodies, dead, their fate? The photo and Tony not identifying the man? Time passing, Bobby’s phone call, robbery, Tony at the lineup, identifying Lou, his denials? The news about Ray, tracking him down, his sitting on the toilet, his arrogance, the scene, his being taken, his denials, the interrogation in the car, returning to the site, Tony desperate?

11. Bobby, the news of his cancer? The DA and dismissing the case? His decision, wanting justice, nothing to lose? Calling Tony, asking him about his vengeance? Confronting Ray, Lou and Ray together, the gun, Bobby shooting Lou? Ray and escape, return to the hut, Tony finding him? Ray and his rationale for his brutal behaviour, his arrogance? The gun, his getting the iron from under the bed, his attack on Tony, his being shot? Tony as blind, wandering out to the road?

12. The ending of the novel, the effect on Susan? The end of Susan story – and her future?

SUCKER

Australia, 2015, 87 minutes, Colour.
John Luc, Lily Sullivan, Timothy Spall, Jacek Koman, Shawn Micallef, Kat Stewart.
Directed by Ben Chessell.

Sucker is a small-budget Australian comedy, written by Lawrence Leung, based on a one-man comedy routine that he created in 2001. Leung himself appears as the uncle of the hero and in framing sequences as the older version of the hero.

This is the story of a young Chinese-Australian? from Melbourne who does not want to do what his ambitious parents want, is fascinated by con-tricks and follows the Professor, a master of all kinds of cons, who takes him on as something of an apprentice. The Professor is played by British actor, Timothy Spall, enjoying himself with a touch of overacting. The young man is played by John Luc.

Also in the act is the Professor’s daughter, Lily Sullivan, and, later, the Professor’s nemesis, Riley, played by Jacek Koman who went off with the Professor’s wife, Kat Stewart.

The action takes place over the Australian countryside, in country towns, with people susceptible to con tricks, several of which are illustrated, one in a store which sells LPs where the manager is played, humorously, by Shawn Micaleff.

The film builds up to a dramatic climax, familiar from those stories about gamblers, and a bittersweet ending with the young man, the professor, his daughter and going back home to his family.

More of a pleasant time passer though interesting in having Chinese Australians at the centre of the film.

1. A comedy about con-men? And serious undertones?


2. The Melbourne settings, suburbs, roads, casino? The Australian countryside and country towns? Open spaces? The atmosphere of the country? The musical score?

3. The title, people taken in by the cons? The cons themselves, their victims?

4. The film based on a one-man show, the creator taking the part of Lawrence’s uncle – and the older bearded Lawrence framing the film?

5. An emphasis on Chinese- Australians? Not much seen in Australian comedies like this?

6. The introduction to Lawrence, the older Lawrence explaining, his voice over about his experiences, the explanation of the cons, the illustration of the popular three card con? Lawrence, 17, at home, the pressure from his parents to do well, his reactions, his capacity for telling lies? His going on the road?

7. His encounter with the Professor, the personality of the Professor, age, experience, from England? The background story of his relationship, his wife, her pregnancy, the
birth of her daughter, the photos of the family? Her leaving with the Professor’s best friend, Riley? The Professor and his career, his explanations of the variety of cons, their names, the steps, the information coming on screen? His invitation to Lawrence? Illustrating the cons? His asking Lawrence to participate, the young girl and the wallet – and the revelation that she was the Professor’s daughter?
8. The daughter, her age, her treatment of Lawrence, friend, not? Difficulties in believing her? On the road, the variety of tricks? Illustration of the Badger, her going to the room with the client, the father coming in, the client paying big money? The irony of Lawrence seeing her with the young man in the alley – but a genuine friendship and his punching Lawrence?

9. The variety of cons, that of the necklace, the greedy people in the pubs, paying for the necklace, losing their money? Lawrence and his trick with the LP, the manager of the shop, his buying the extra LPs, the alternate person behind the counter, Lawrence and his pretending to be Japanese, rescuing his girlfriend, the failure of the con?

10. The buildup to the competition, the background story of Riley and the Professor’s wife, visualised?

11. At the casino, the professor proving that Lawrence wanted to be there and did not go home, Lawrence’s encounter with Riley, Riley knowing all the tricks?

12. The special game, $10,000, the man being eliminated, the competitor and his complaint about cheating, Lawrence beating Riley, the money?

13. The double ending and the con, the outlining of the steps? The daughter, with Lawrence in the car, the letter, his going into the Professor, the Professor saying the letter was for him, reading it, the girl going off? Lawrence giving the Professor Chinese Lucky money? The alternative scenario, the Professor reading the letter to Lawrence, Lawrence keeping the money, the Professor all right for money? His daughter standing on her own feet? Lawrence acknowledging that the girl was Riley’s daughter not the Professors?

14. Lawrence, going back home,? And the older Lawrence looking back on the experience?

15. The two actors seen in the studio, on the set, talking with each other, walking off?