BEFORE WE GO

US, 2013, 90 minutes, Colour.
Chris Evans, Alice Eve.
Directed by Chris Evans.

Before We Go is a romantic comedy with quite some differences. The setting is New York City, and the focus on to people who meet by chance.

Chris Evans, who also directed the film, plays a trumpeter in search of a gig. By chance, he encounters a young woman who is in financial need. The film is basically a two-hander, showing the interactions between the two, her initial suspicions, his being agreeable, the background music, his playing the trumpet, going for an audition, her singing, yet her concern about meeting her unfaithful husband.

Alice Eve portrays the young woman, explaining her journey from England through Europe to America, her relationship. It also shows the mutual attraction between the couple but also highlights the nature of friendship and support.

1. A variation on a romantic comedy? Not going in anticipated directions?

2. New York story, the various locations, the streets, clubs, subway stations, hotels, wedding celebrations, train rides…? The musical score – and Nick playing the trumpet, the performance at the social, Brooke singing, My Valentine?

3. The introduction to Nick, Chris Evans’ performance, his directing the film? Playing the trumpet in the station, people busy, the donations, Brooke hurrying by, dropping her phone, Nick pursuing her, her missing the train and her being upset, Nick giving her the phone back, the conversation, her being curt, is being considerate?

4. The film as a two-hander? The hours in New York City? The evening, activities, decisions, the night, the next morning and the parting?

5. The personalities of each of the characters, Chris Evans and Alice Eve, sympathetic to the audience? The gradual revelation of each of their story?

6. Nick, his age, experience, studying medicine, wanting to make a difference, his relationship, the bitter breakup, his wanting his ex-girlfriend to try again? Love for music, taking the trumpet, going for auditions? Jobs? His being considerate to Brooke, trying to help, the ticket, her money, her bag, the contacts, phone calls, trying to recover the bag? Walking around the city? Gradually revealing himself and his story? Going to the reception, getting the money, playing, Brooke singing, the actual band arriving, their going to the green room, trying to get the hire car to take Brooke to Boston, failure? Nick and his ideas, going to the hotel, the attraction, talking, Brooke’s revelations? His taking her to the station, the affection, the device of the phone calls from the future to give them advice in the present? The farewell?

7. Brooke, upset, in the city, trying to get to Boston, the train leaving, the phone call from her husband, her planning to be there when he came back, trying to delay him? The tension in the marriage, his infidelity? Her love for him? The gradually revealing his story to Nick, England, Paris, coming to America, meeting her husband, in love? The tension, her promising to meet him, the saving of the marriage? Her abruptness, her later apologies to Nick, liking him, accompanying him, for the bag, to the gig, her singing, the attempt to get the hire car, going to the hotel, the affectionate talking, the attraction – yet a love for her husband, Nick taking her to the station, her going on the train?

8. A film about friendship, attraction, the possibility of loving more than one person – and the open end?

BEHEMOTH

China, 2015, 90 minutes, Colour.
Directed by Liang Zhao.

Behemoth is the name of a biblical monster.By the end of this documentary, the identity of Behemoth is humanity itself. This documentary won the SIGNIS, World Catholic Association for Communication, award at the 2015 Venice film Festival.

The film is a documentary but it is also a cinema poem, making a great impact with its visuals as well is its poetic commentary and its focus on Dante’s Inferno with an enigmatic man appearing every so often, naked, lying on the earth, quoting Dante -like verses about the hell that the birth is becoming.

The setting of the film is central Mongolia, a Chinese perspective on the destruction of the earth through mining. There are many vistas of the mines, the blasts and explosions, the vastness of the expense of destruction, the roads, the long line of trucks filled with coal… Inferno -like images in themselves.

The contrast is with the local people, those with their herds, the disappearance of the grasslands, industry overtaking the earth.

The film for also focuses on the miners, seeing them in close-up, going down the mines, the endless trucks and drivers.The film also takes us into the towns, working shantytowns, wives and children coping with the hard work of husbands and fathers – and, sometimes, the women having to go out during the night to work on filling the coal trucks. There is very little bright colour so it is a surprise when we go into a home and see a coverlet in red – which means that the lives of the ordinary people are harsh, hard, dirty, needing continued washing, and with very few prospects of change and hope.

While this film is a poetic indictment of life in some parts of China, industrialisation, it also takes us into the vast cities being built, blocks and blocks of high-rise accommodation, empty, and modern streets with blinking traffic lights but practically no traffic.

The film is not particularly hopeful in its outlook – it is rather and visual, emotional and intellectual challenge.

1. The impact of the film? Awards?

2. The title, the biblical creature and monster, the story of creation, God in creation, God and people? The monster on earth? Destructive, the application of the image to human beings and the destruction of Earth?

3. The film as a documentary, message, the beauty of the earth, destruction, industry, mines and coal, resources and energy, open face, coalmines and shafts? Images of devastation? The continued stream of trucks, the coal, making cliffs, the contrast with the green fields and the flocks, the transition of the film to the city and the point made about the extravagance of empty cities?

4. The poetic dimension of the film, the references to the Divine Comedy? The verse, the themes? The naked man lying on the earth, finally standing and looking at the world? The musical score?

5. The photography, the vistas and the impact, the cutting of the earth, the explosions, the layers of excavation, the long roads, long lines of trucks, bumper-to-bumper? The open cut mines, going down the lift, the shafts, the various levels, the rails and the wagons, the dangers?

6. The portrait of the workers, the hard work, the variety of tasks and responsibilities, the dirt, the scenes of washing, men and women, loading the trucks, the small vehicles, even during the night? Homes, clothes, drabness, the bright quilt and its contrast? The drab lives of the workers? Homes and the collective? No picture of any boss or executive?

7. Mongolia, the sheep, going down the cliffs, the cattle with the sheep, the Mongolian tents and dwelling place for the family, the men, the women, the children in the fields? Living side-by-side with industry?

8. The transition to the cities, empty, few vehicles, the traffic lights, the vast tall buildings? The information about these Chinese cities?

9. A film for China, the world – a challenge?

FLIGHT CREW

Russia, 2016, 128 minutes, Colour.
Danila Kozlovskiy, Vladimir Mashkov, Agne Grudyte, Sergei Romanovich;
Directed by Nikolai Levedev.

Flight Crew seems rather a quiet and unassuming name for this adrenaline-pumping disaster and heroism film.

In the latter part of the 20th century, the American film industry capitalised on so many disaster films, whetting the audience appetite for dangers that they could identify with, especially with airport and so many flight disaster films – which continued into the 21st century. More latterly, the Russian film industry has been producing its own disaster films. This one is quite competitive with American productions.

Because the film is so exciting, audiences will make allowance for the plausibilities and implausibilities of the plot – and there are many of these. The screenplay is humanised by its focus on the central characters. Young pilot, Alex, is shown to be quite genial, especially when he takes a stand against an official who uses a cargo plane for getting gift cars to a wedding and wanting to dispose of a cargo of charity goods. He loses his job and goes for another and is tested quite effectively in a sophisticated simulator. The officer in charge is rather disdainful but eventually hires him and becomes reliant on him.

There is also the touch of romance, a chance encounter between Alex and Sandra and his helping her with her locked-in parked car. There is a back story for the stern pilot, his being away from home, his relationship with his wife, the troubles with his teenage son who has moments of rebellion.

The next flight scenes to lull the audience into relaxing and watching commercial flights – though Alex does challenge one of the Russian Mafia who wants to drink cognac and smoke as the plane takes off. There is an episode indicating dangers when a flight goes to Africa and has to take off with fleeing foreigners leaving the locals storming the runway during a revolution.

But this is all to get us ready for the big moments, a rescue flight to an island which has been experiencing earthquakes, shattering the airport terminal, planes disabled – and this because of the eruption of a volcano which sends out fireballs and lava streams. There is chaos at the airport, plenty of panicking passengers, shouting and screaming, trying to escape…

There are heroics with minibuses amidst the lava, dangerous takeoffs, even more dangerous flights – and a mid-air feat which has to be seen to be believed. Even at the end we might wonder whether it was possible or not.

So, reasonably interesting characters, even more interesting situations, and even more exciting action sequences and special effects – but definitely not an in-flight movie!

1. The tradition of the disaster action film? Into the 21st-century? Contemporary stories, technology, heroism?

2. Audience familiarity with American conventions? The Russians and their use of the conventions? Similarities, differences?

3. The title, the expectations, the personnel, the characters in themselves, relationships, their work and their skills? The heroism?

4. The Russian city, the airports, commercial flights, terminals, cargo? Homes and the domestic sequences? The atmospheric score?

5. The special effects and action? The initial flight, the heavy plane, the buffeting, the dropping of the car into the lake? The simulation machine, the flights, the crashes? The ordinary commercial flights and the various cities visited?

6. Africa, foreigners allowed to leave, the locals and their trying to get onto the plane? Alex, his wanting to help, Leonid?

7. The island, the earthquake and its repercussions, the volcano, the lava, the buses and the crash, the fires, the airport and light, buildings tumbling? The cargo ship taking off, the commercial flight taking off, fires in the engines, the ash cloud? The action with the two planes, the transfer in midair, the basket, the loads, the people saved? The people falling? The difficulties of the landing, the storm, the crashes? The adrenaline for the audience?

8. The introduction to Alex, casual, on the flight, his decision about the charity goods, the car, letting the car drop? Losing his job? Applications for the new job, the encounter with Leonid and his severity, firing the pilot? In the simulation, showing his skills, Leonid asking for more difficulties, the simulated crash? Leonid and his being urged to do the same thing? Also crashing? Hiring the Trainee? Alex, the encounter with Sandra, her car, driving it out? The further encounters with her, the fact that she was a pilot? The relationship, its development? Alex and his being second pilot on the commercial trips, the African trip and his wanting to help? Mafia type, wanting cognac, smoking, his bodyguard, fighting with Alex? Leonid standing up to the authorities, being more favourable to him? The set up of the special crew, with Sandra, with Andrew, Vicki and the staff? Going into the island, the earthquake, his tough stances, taking the minibus, rescuing the people, the lava falling, the passengers escaping across the roof? Going to the plane, the takeoff, the fire, the reaction of the passengers? Vicki and her fascination with Alex? Andrew and his heroism with the minibus? His clash with Sandra, her being a pilot? The idea for the midair transfer, the execution, his holding the plane, his tension in landing the plane, unable to see? His father and the alienation? His father guiding him how to rescue the people? The pilots lining up, Sandra married?

9. Sandra, pilot, the first interaction with Alex, the comment about people’s reaction to a female pilot, second-class citizen? In action? In the backseat during the final landing?

10. Leonid, tough, dismissive, the test of the failure, his own crash, hiring Alex, their work together, his hiring Sandra? The volcano, his decisions, taking the cargo plane and rescuing the people? Collaborating with the midair transfer, going across on the rope? Helping with the landing? At home, his wife, being absent, the son and the conflicts, the son and his exercise, studies, the tutor for English, the sexual reaction, the reaction of his parents? Leonid taking him away for the month, his participation in the rescue, his heroism – and the final meal sequence?

11. The flight attendants, Vicki and her flirting, Andrew and Alex’s comment that it was a woman’s job? Andrew and his heroics with the minibus, with the transfer of passengers? Vicki and her attraction?

12. The managers, their attitudes, the man taking the cars for the wedding and dismissing the charity cargo? The owners, at the controls, Alex’s father? The decision about the final flight?

13. The impact of the quake, the lava, the fire?

14. The plausibility of the plot, the low flight, the wire, the basket, the doors, saving the passengers?

15. The range of passengers, familiar characters, those afraid, those heroic, children, young marrieds…?

16. The audience identifying with the ordinary people, the fears, the dangers, the landing and their being saved?

THE ACCOUNTANT

US, 2016, 128 minutes, Colour.
Ben Affleck, Anna Kendrick, J. K. Simmons, Jon Bernthal, Jeffrey Tambor, Cynthia Addai- Robinson, John Lithgow, Jean Smart, Andy Umberger.
Directed by Gavin O'Connor.

Here is a very entertaining thriller that keeps the audience continually alert, needing to pay attention to the wide-ranging plot developments. With such a simple title, The Accountant, not much is revealed – but the screenplay offers quite an amount of revelation. This review perhaps errs on the side of cautiousness in not revealing any of the key aspects of the plot.

One of the major themes of this film is autism. It opens at an Institute in the 1980s and a little boy, who has the makings of a genius, manifests the narrow autistic focus as well as the potential for being deeply disturbed by failure in what he wanted to accomplish and physical and psychological effects. His military father decides that he needs to face the world rather than an institution, even though the boy has made friends with a little girl there.

Then we see the boy as an adult, the accountant, working in a suburban shopfront, advising a farming couple in financial straits, very direct, unemotional, but knowing what he should do. They befriend him, invite into their home for hunting, and he accepts to visit for shooting – at which he is more than expert.

Also at the beginning of the film, the camera shadows a policeman crossing a street, gun drawn, scuffles in the street, shots inside a building, going up a staircase – and the silhouette of the gun on the wall. Fade to black. When there is a recap of this scene later in the film, it opens up all kinds of questions.

One of the key factors for the entertainment given by this film is the well written screenplay, which would seem to be based on one of those high-powered action thriller novels but is, in fact, an original piece of writing. Important in the screenplay are the flashbacks and the moments of insertion into the narrative, always revealing just that bit more about the accountant, his growing up, his father and his brother caring for him, and gradually more information as to how he became such a significant accountant and a phone voice telling him where to go for different jobs.

A praiseworthy aspect of the screenplay is that with so many threads, they are gradually brought together in ways we were not anticipating, interesting connections which throw light on the accountant and other characters, even to the very end where the screenplay does not push the final piece of information but more subtly lets the audience become aware of it, bringing it all to a satisfying ending.

Ben Affleck is the accountant. This is one of his better performances, his being able to capitalise on what some critics have referred to as his woodenness in performance – he brings it to bear on the focused autistic characteristics, the genius of maths, the intensity of finishing work undertaken, being taught how to recognise emotional situations while not being able to identify with them. In this he is very much helped by the character played by Jeffrey Tambor.

The film has a very interesting supporting cast with Anna Kendrick as an accountant who uncovers financial discrepancies at her company, which is run by John Lithgow, assisted by his sister, Jean Smart. There are hired killers, especially one played by John Bernthal who becomes entangled with the accountant. J. K. Simmons is the head of an investigative department of Treasury in Washington and Cynthia Addai- Robinson is effective as the young Treasury official who is commissioned to investigate the accountant and identify him.

Those who like this film very much, as this reviewer does, would hope that audiences would share the interest, the intrigue, and the satisfying bringing together of so many plot threads.

1. The title – leading to expectations?

2. The American settings, Chicago, Washington, shops and suburbs, homes, farms, offices, companies? The program for autistic children?

3. The introduction, the tone, police, the camera shadowing the police, the deaths, the room and stairs, the shadow of the gun? The killings – and the recap at the end, Ray King, the links, the consequences?

4. The range of threads in the plot, and their all being brought together satisfactorily – even to the end?

5. Washington, Ray King, about to retire, Treasury? His style, calling in Medina, the interview, her actual file, his hold over her, the quest, to find the accountant? His deadline? The details of her work, detection, studying the criminal gangs, the photos, the reconstruction of the face, the voice techniques, Simon Grundy and the repetition? The names of financial geniuses – with autism or Asperges? The agent and her checking each character? Her shrewdness, targeting Christian Wolff, the range of companies, the photo of the shopfront? Identifying him? Going to Ray?

6. The film and its focus on autism, audience response, knowledge of it? As a theme? The Institute, the director, his explanations to the parents? Diagnoses? The boy, his tantrums, losing a piece from the puzzle, the little girl helping, their friendship? His quiet brother looking on, protection? The parents wanting a normal life? The army background, taking him away? His relationship with his parents, his mother and her exasperation, leaving? His brother’s reaction, resenting her? Going to Indonesia, the training, the strong trainer, the father’s
demands, the boys developing their martial arts skills?

7. The flashbacks for explaining the accountant’s character? The funeral, his being in the Army with his father, their being ousted, the fight, the father’s death, the accountant going to prison? Meeting Francis in prison, their friendship? Francis communicating all the information, the accountant retaining it? His devotion to Francis? Francis training him how torecognise emotions? Francis as a character, the interviews with Ray, becoming an informant, the prison term, getting out, exposed and taken by the gangs, the torture, his death? The accountant and his wanting revenge? The initial killings and the explanation?

8. Christian, his shopfront, the couple and the interview about taxation, country people, his helping them? The manifestations of his autism, the narrow focus of attention, mathematical genius? Wanting to finish his tasks? The necklace, his suggesting the industry, suggesting the vehicle for their work, the dining room as an office? The tax help? The gratitude? Inviting him out, his hunting, the shooting scenes, illustrating his skills at such a distance – and preparing the audience for this in practice? The attack on the farm, the abduction of the couple, the car, the accuracy of his shooting?

9. Chris and his accountancy skills, working with all the criminal gangs, International? His motivations, finding out the gang who killed Francis and getting revenge? His skills, attention? The genius with numbers and maths? The donations to the institute for autism? His keeping cash?

10. Lamar Black employing him? The phone instructions from the female British voice? Meeting with Dana, her work, discovering the discrepancy, her amazement at his work? Sharing lunch, his autistic responses, not relating well? Drawing on Francis and his training how to recognise emotions? His examining the documents, covering the glass with statistics and dates? Finding the solution? Lamar Black’s friend, for many years, skimming the accounts, the killers coming, his diabetes, the overdose of insulin? Lamar’s sister, her suspicions? The discussions with Chris? Her death? The revelation of the boss behind the killings? His motivations, financial explanations, his wanting robotics to help people with injuries – and his showing Chris the extent of his work? His hiring the thugs? The killer? In the house, Chris infiltrating, killing the thugs, Lamar Black’s speech, Chris shooting him?

11. Simon Grundy, the brothers discovering each other, the hold off? Their talk, memories, the brother and his resentment towards Chris about going to the funeral and his father’s death? The killer seen in action, his skills compared with those of Chris? The reconciliation?

12. The attempt on the couple’s life, blaming Dana? Her being followed, the corridors, the killers, her refuge in the bathroom, her skills in defending herself? Chris rescuing her? Going to the lavish hotel? The talk, her personal story, art student, the story of her getting the dress for her prom, her skills with money, blackjack? Her being in the shed, discovering all his weapons, the paintings? The discussion about the dogs gambling? His leaving? The end and the gift of Jackson Pollock?

13. Ray, the complexity of his life, explaining to Medina, the chances he had, trying to make something of himself, his tracking the accountant, the accountant not killing him, being a family man? His dealings with Francis? The press conference, the praise for Medina, her praising Ray and their team work?

14. The Institute, the autistic boy and his parents, the tour, the director’s daughter and her autism, the expensive machine? And the irony of the British voice who telephoned Chris and setting him on all his quests – and it being the voice of her machine?

15. A satisfying ending, Dana and the paintings? Chris and his driving off in his caravan?

YOU, ME AND DUPREE

US, 2006, 110 minutes, Colour.
Owen Wilson, Kate Hudson, Matt Dillon, Michael Douglas, Seth Rogen, Bill Hader, Lance Armstrong.
Directed by Anthony and James Russo.

This is the kind of light entertainment that audiences (well, audiences in affluent western countries) enjoy. Box-office receipts go sky-high and quickly. Non-American? critics, on the other hand, love to decry these films, they’re so… “American”. Well, so they are. Why wouldn’t they be? Americans don’t act like the British.

The other complaint about this one is that it is misogynist and homophobic. Maybe. The real trouble is the character of Dupree. He is the American slacker personified. He acts like an adolescent narcissist. He sails through life with others making excuses for him, never really challenging him to grow up. Owen Wilson has the style to embody this kind of character on screen (come to think of it, weren’t the Wedding Crashers more than a bit like this?).

For the first half of the film, Dupree is the kind of character who might be funny on screen but that you would loathe in real life. When he loses his job and home and moves in with newly-weds, his best friend Carl (Matt Dillon) and Molly (Kate Hudson), more than predictable havoc occurs. This is particularly wearing on Molly. Then comes a moment in the film when the screenplay says that Molly has to take pity on the turfed-out Dupree sitting disconsolate in the pouring rain. Whether this is psychologically credible at this moment is debatable. But it happens. Dupree is back, Molly is caring and Carl is being driven demented.

It doesn’t help that Carl is continually being belittled by Molly’s father, his boss, played by Michael Douglas as a just as greedy but more obtuse Gordon Gecko. Matt Dillon is to be commended for being so willing to be the fall guy of the film.

Now that Molly likes him and he tries to reform, Dupree becomes lovable. And that appeals to the audience because, ultimately, he comes out as everyone’s best friend, confidant and all-round champ. There is an amusing postscript when Dupree does find a job – a motivational expert who exhorts people to acknowledge their ‘ness’ (adding to their name) which, after the credits, is seen in Lance Armstrong, something of a hero to Dupree, trying to emphasise his “lance-ness”!

So, there you have it – or not!

1. A romantic comedy, variations? The strong cast?

2. The all locations? Mansions, beaches, hotels,, business offices? The musical score?

3. The introduction to Molly and Carl, engaged, Dupree’s friendship with Carl, the two in love, Molly’s father and his harshness, CEO of the business, disparaging Carl? The marriage?

4. Carl himself, Neil his friend, Dupree as a friend, the bond between them, Dupree coming to the wedding, landing on the wrong island, having to be rescued? Presence at the wedding? Mr Thompson’s attitude? Carl going to work, the promotion, the plans of the adoption, yet his father-in-law wanting him to have a vasectomy? Carl and his friends?

5. Dupree, Owen Wilson and his screen presence, type, erratic, landing on the wrong island, needing to be rescued, with Neil, with Carl, laughing over problems? At the wedding? His need for shelter, Molly inviting him into? His messy and disruptive behaviour? At work, having the Mormon assistant, the sexual relationship? The candles, the burning of the front room? His being kicked out?

6. Carl, at work, diligent, yet disparaged by his father-in-law?

7. Molly and Carl, fighting Dupree, in the rain, bringing him back?

8. Dupree’s reform, coming back, decorating the house, bonding with the kids, pleasant manner, cooking? Carl late, the limited jealousy of Dupree?

9. Dupree, out again, getting on the roof, falling in?

10. Carl and the deterioration of his life? His father-in-law liking Dupree, taking him fishing? Carl attacking? Carl hit, in hospital? The challenge to Mr Thompson?

11. The search for Carl, Dupree getting the kids, Dupree and Carl in the bar, breaking in to Mr Thompson’s office, finding his prejudice against Carl?

12. The character of Mr Thompson, severe, ambitious, capricious in his relationships?

13. Molly, in love with Carl, long-suffering?

14. The happy resolution?

15. Dupree, becoming a motivational speaker, writing a book – and Lance Armstrong reading his book?

PRETTY PERSUASION

US, 2006, 104 minutes, Colour.
Evan Rachel Wood, Ron Livingston, Adi Schnall, Elizabeth Harnois, Jane Krakowski.
Directed by Marco Siega.

The young star of this rather acidic satire, Evan Rachel Wood, is pretty but the film’s themes are definitely not.

What looks like a high school drama with problems in a dysfunctional family (and it is) turns into something much more. Wood’s portrayal of young Kimberley Joyce can be quickly compared to Nicole Kidman’s cheerfully ruthless TV weather presenter in To Die For (and Emily Barclay’s completely amoral teenage manipulator in Suburban Mayhem). But Kimberley is far more intelligent, far more devious, far more self-confident on the surface while carrying enormous chips on her shoulder. She wreaks havoc on all those around her.

We first see her with a Muslim student at a rather exclusive Beverly Hills high school. Her language sounds genial, friendly and tolerant but is unselfconsciously patronising, even racist. And when we meet her slob of a father (James Wood) who mouthes so much bigotry while urging his daughter not to be racist – but be honest – it is no wonder. Kimberley has a best friend, Brittany (what else?) who is now dating the school jock and could be the star of the school play as Anne Frank. Kimberley is always accommodating and sexually precocious – but we know that deep down… and we are appalled as she sets about destroying everyone by instigating her friends to accuse the English teacher (Ron Livingston) of sexual harassment and take him to court. What happens has to be seen to be believed.

This is very black satire, very cleverly done. We are sometimes aghast at what the characters are saying, outrageous politically incorrect statements that make one smile as well as make one disgusted. The film is well acted, intelligently written, the writer, Skander Halim, coming from Montreal with a Dutch mother and Bangladeshi father who could well have experienced some of the mishaps he includes in this bitterly funny


1. The immediate impact of the film? As a drama? As character portraits? As exploitation? As satire?

2. The town, homes, businesses, the high school, classrooms, offices? Realistic atmosphere? Musical score?

3. The moral perspective of the film, the focus on Kimberley, her manipulative behaviour, unscrupulous, with her father, with her friends, with the teacher? Audiences unsympathetic to her, her ability to charm people, challenge the audience, have them on her side?

4. Kimberley, her age, background, her father and his manner, language, unscrupulous, anti-racism? His influence on his daughter? Expectations of her? Her stepmother and Kimberley putting her down? Brittany and the other friends, wanting the role of Anne Frank, Brittany getting the role? Her plotting against the teacher, spying, the information, inciting her friends? Denunciation, the principal of the school, the police? The courts?

5. Brittany, a character, following Kimberley, naive, collaboration, theatre, the role of Anne Frank? Kimberley his jealousy? Her collusion with Kimberley, against the English teacher, the consequences? Adi, from the Middle East, becoming part of Kimberley’s group, supportive, the effect on her?

6. Kimberley’s father, his work, at home, relationship with his new wife? Her attitude, to her husband, to Kimberley, long-suffering?

7. The teacher, his personality, at school, at home with his wife, the sexual relationship? His being the target of attack? His reaction, the consequences? The police?

8. The court, truth and fabrication, attacks, victimisation? The effect of the teacher?

9. Kimberley, the end, her behaviour, sexual behaviour, her age and experience and inexperience, manipulative, the consequences?

THE PEOPLE VERSUS FRITZ BAUER/ DER STAAT VS FRITZ BAUER

Germany, 2015, 105 minutes, Colour.
Burgart Klaussner, Ronald Zehrfeld.
Directed by Lars Kraume.

At the same time as this film was released, there was another German film, Labyrinth of Lies, going over some of the same material and featuring the character, Fritz Bauer, as central to the action. However, in this film he is quite centrestage.

Fritz Bauer may not be a familiar name to film audiences or, perhaps, German audiences. The screenplay fills in his background. He was a strong socialist in the 1930s, in the public eye, clashing with the Nazis, arrested, sentenced to a concentration camp but, to his later regret as expressed in this film, submitting to them and being released. He was also Jewish.

This film is set in the late 1950s. Bauer is one of the attorney generals in Germany, based in Frankfurt. Part of his role is to pursue Nazis who had taken up significant positions in the now prospering West Germany under the leadership of President Adenauer. He has many files, has young attorneys pursuing the suspects – and these include files on Adolf Eichmann, creator of the Final Solution, but who has disappeared since the war.

Burgart Klaussner makes an impression as Fritz Bauer, busy about his work, not being physically will, upset by the action of a number of authorities, men who had been in the Nazi party and resented him and kept him under surveillance.

One of the principal aspect of this film is his role in the abduction of Adolf Eichmann and his being taken to Israel for trial – though Bauer actually wanted him to be tried in Germany itself so that Germans would become conscious of what it happened in the 1930s and 1940s.

There are some scenes with Eichmann in Argentina, living an ordinary life, his son dating one of the local girls, her father recognising him and writing to Bauer, leading to further investigations, Bauer getting in touch with Mossad for his return to Germany but the Mossad wanting a second independent source. In the meantime, Bauer has appointed one of his junior attorneys whom he trusts to help him. It is he who has a journalist friend who is able to confirm that Eichmann is in Argentina although the German authorities suggested Bauer that he is in fact in Kuwait.

The abduction scene is very brief but effective.

There is a subplot concerning the young attorney, his defending a young homosexual man in court, Bauer (who had some pre-war convictions of homosexual acts suggesting a precedent with the lenient sentence which the judge ignores. The young woman in the court invites the attorney to visit a club – which leads to the attorney, a married man, and his potential downfall.

The film does not go on to the Eichmann trial – there are many films which illustrate the taking of Eichmann, The House on Garibaldi Street, The Man in the Glass Booth and the role of Hannah Arendt in the film of that name. Final information indicates Bauer’s role in the taking of many former Nazis to court in the early 1960s – which is also, in more detail, a subject of Labyrinth of Lies.

1. A 21st-century perspective on Germany in the 20th century? Nazis, the Holocaust, Eichmann and his role, Germany in the aftermath of the war, Adenauer, German progress in the 1950s? Ignorance of the Holocaust and concentration camp past?

2. Recreation of the period, in Frankfurt, government offices, apartments, nightclubs, the government? The visit to Israel and the Mossad? The scenes in Argentina, Eichmann, the arrest? The musical score?

3. Bauer as a historical character, his being a Socialist in the 1930s, Jewish, arrested, concentration camp, bowing to the Nazis, expressing his great regret about this? In Frankfort, attorney general, his pursuit of Nazis, of Eichmann, of those responsible in Auschwitz?

4. The opening, in the bath, seeming to drown, is chauffeur the rescue, his recovery? Is age, seeing him at work, official attitudes towards him, the former Nazis in government? The Adenauer government? Relationship with Israel, the United States? His files, files disappearing? His pursuit of the Nazis? Those plotting against him, spying on him? His going to the television program, the questions, his responses, not glorifying the past, the achievements of people in the present? The acclaim for his performance?

5. His assistant attorneys, Karl and his work, having the file on Schneider? Bauer trusting him? Karl, his role as an attorney, the homosexuality case, the advice from Bauer, the fine of five marks, the trial, those present, the judge, the jail sentence? The party at home, his relationship with his wife, sexual hesitance, wanting a child? The girl from the court, the card, his visiting the club, her songs, wariness, the sexual encounter, the audience discovering that the girl was male, in love with the imprisoned gay man, the photos, the blackmail, his explanations to Bauer? The official asking him to betray Bauer and his treason? Listening to Bauer and his regrets about bowing to the Nazis? His role concerning Eichmann, the contact with the journalist, following the files, discussions with Bauer, going to the Governor? Getting the tapes of Eichmann from the journalist? His finally sacrificing himself for Bauer?

6. Eichmann, reputation, fleeing to Argentina, his ordinary life, the interviews, his arrogance about his role in the Final Solution yet lack of responsibility, the tapes? His son, dating the young woman, their outings? Her father, recognising Eichmann, the letter to Bauer, offering the information? Bauer going to the Mossad, their wanting two sources for Eichmann’s presence in Argentina, the officials indicating that he was in Kuwait, Karl going to the journalist, getting the information, the possible scoop? Eichmann on the bus, seeing the newspaper article, the abduction? Going to Israel – and Israel not wanting to extradite him to Germany? The arms deal between Israel and the United States?

7. The hostility towards Bauer, Nazi flags in the mail, bullets? His asking the authorities for help? Their suspicions? Spying on him going to Israel? Wanting to cut him down for treason, the attempted blackmail of Karl?

8. Karl and the journalist, the contact, the information, Argentina, the tapes?

9. Mossad, the interest, the officials, the meetings with Bauer, his return, his strong stand, keeping his source confidential? The team, going to Argentina, the breakdown of the car on the road, the quick abduction of Eichmann? Phoning Bauer?

10. Bauer and Karl, going to the Governor, the explanation that Eichmann would not be extradited to Germany?

11. Bauer, thinking of resignation, his own background and homosexual relationships, the distance from his wife, his sister in Denmark, his advice to Karl – Karl’s sacrifice and his decision to stay on and work, especially for the trials against the officials in Auschwitz?

12. Audience interest in this perspective on German history?

FATAL HONEYMOON

Australia/US, 2012, 90 minutes, Colour.
Harvey Keitel, Billy Miller, Amber Clayton, Gary Sweet, Andrew S. Gilbert.
Directed by Nadia Tass.

Fatal Honeymoon is a television movie capitalising on actual events, the death of a young wife, drowned at the Barrier Reef and the charges against her husband for murdering her.

What the film focuses on is the couple, the smooth and sinister charm of the husband, the eagerness of his wife, loving him but also getting away from a rather smothering relationship with her father, the film also focuses on the father, his grief, his quest for vengeance – and he is played by Harvey Keitel.

Most of the action of the film takes place in Alabama, the home state of the couple. The screenplay builds up the relationship, its tensions, the unreliability of the husband. He is a keen diver and his wife is not but she agrees to go diving during their honeymoon in Australia at the Barrier Reef. She dies 11 days after the wedding.

The style of the film is very much popular magazine, giving some background to the story but also feeding somewhat on audience curiosity. While the husband was charged with murder, he pleaded guilty to negligence and manslaughter and received short sentence, going home to America where he was charged again but the case dismissed.

Of interest is the fact that the director is Nadia Tass who made such films as Malcolm, The Big Steal, Rikki and Pete.

1. A film designed for the television audience? The headline title? The television style, the popular audience? Audience curiosity?

2. An Australian film, the director, the cast, the American sequences and cast? The musical score?

3. The atmosphere of Alabama, the Thomas household, College, homes, diving? Australian sequences, the Sydney and koala insertions? Barrier reef, diving, the water? The courts and the law? The media?

4. The narrative, moving backwards and forwards? Tommy and his grief, remembering the past, Tina and Gabe meeting, love, Tommy’s disapproval, his wife’s attitude? Gabe waiting, the ring, the right time, eventually the occasion, kneeling, the proposal? The marriage? The issue of the insurance – and its being delayed? The scene with the Watsons, their support of Gabe, his brother

5. The scenes in Australia, the honeymoon, diving, the visuals, the computer and the indication of Gabe’s behaviour, the witnesses? Killing her or not, cutting off her oxygen?

6. Whether Gabe loved Tina or not, his motivations, a flirt, his mental condition? The performance and the actor able to convey both charm and suspicion, being sinister?

7. Tina’s death, Gabe not grieving, on the other boat? People’s reaction?

8. The Australian police, pursuing Gabe, the arrest, the interrogations, their being filmed, the inconsistencies in his story?

9. Tommy, upset, with his wife? His dominance of Tina and her reaction? Being aggressive, the TV interviews, the years passing, wanting evidence?

10. Four years, Gabe, his character, meeting Kim, proposal, being happy? The search warrant and his reaction?

11. His legal contacts, advice, marrying Kim, the decision to surrender and to avoid being charged with murder?

12. The interlude with the Australian disc jockey, his comments on the situation, the characters, Americans, tourism…?

13. The court scene, Tommy present, Gabe admitting to negligence, the sentence, his going to jail, serving the sentence, getting out?

14. His return to the United States, the warrant for his arrest, the further interrogations, the court case – and his being freed?

15. The impact of the case in its time, in the United States, in Australia?

THE LAST PRINCESS

Korea, 2016, 127 minutes, Colour.
Ye-jin Son, Hae-il Park,
Directed by Jin-ho Hur

Here is a piece of 20th-century Korean history. Most audiences around the world would not be familiar with the characters and events, especially from 1919 and during the 1920s and 30s, into World War II and its aftermath.

The last princess of the title is the daughter of the last Emperor of Korea. after World War I, Japan’s influence in Korea was very strong and it became the colonial outpost of the Japanese Empire. The Emperor resisted this domination by Japan – and he was murdered. While his son became the ruler, subservient to Japan, his younger sister, very young when her father died, by the mid-20s, was being urged to go to Japan for her education. Reluctantly, parting from her mother and her homeland, she did go to Japan but was not to return for another 38 years.

Much of the attention to the history of this part of the world during the 1920s and 30s has been on the Sino- Japanese conflict, the subject of many films from China itself, especially the siege of Nanking in 1937.

There were nationalist Korean movements in Japan at this time, especially a plan for the ruler and for his sister to be smuggled out of Japan and back to Korea. This episode provides quite some drama for the film, tension and action, but it was thwarted.

The princess remained in Japan, a marriage for her to a Japanese husband was arranged, but over the years, with the divorce, her mental and emotional condition collapsed.

The framework of the drama in fact is the events of the early 1960s, the work of the journalist trying to find the location of the princess, his memories of the past and his active intervention in the escape plan for the princess. In this sense, he is the hero of the film while the sinister minister with power over Korea becomes Ye-jin Son as the princess, especially her ageing over the decades, makes quite some impact and draws us into her story, her final deterioration.

An excellent opportunity, over two hours, to learn about Korea in the 20th century and its transformation from Empire to its colonial period and the transitions after World War II.

1. Korean duty history? The 20th century?

2. The recreation of the period, costumes and decor from the 1920s, through the 1930s of the war, postwar? The musical score?

3. The title, audience knowledge of the princess? Audience knowledge of Korea, the Empire? Japan and its colonial government? The experience of World War II, the effect on Japan,
the after mass Japan, on Korea?

4. The two stories, the past and 1961 and the search? The dramatic intercutting?

5. 1919, the family and the photo portrait, the robes of costumes, the dignity and decor? The Emperor, his son and wife, the Princess, the colonial government, the Korea empire, the desire for independence, officials meeting with the Emperor and the accusation of corruption? Han, the assassin, the poison, the Emperor dying, his daughter being present?

6. The transition to 1925, the ruler, the princesses older brother, his wife and family? The threads, the ominous presence of our? Jamg-han and his name, introduced to the princess, his later role?

7. Japanese power, Han and his role, the pressures? The kowtowing to Japan?

8. The discussions about the princess going to Japan to study, her not wanting to go, the mother, the promised to return, and not returning and her mother dying?

9. The Japanese domination of Korea, the ruler and his wife going to Japan? Japanese customs and style, dress and kimonos, the princess trying to keep her independence?

10. The maid, the loyalty, the maid being taken away – but present when the princess returned home?

11. The government, Han and his role?

12. Jang-han, soldier, with and, the discussions about Han and his not having gone to the Academy? Loyalties?

13. The plan for the escape? The princess agreeing? The brother and his reluctance, yet being persuaded? His wife and her resistance? The details of the plan, the people involved?
The timing? The suicide bomber, going to the celebration? His going to the front, the delay, Han escaping, the bomb exploding? The timing, the princess and her being secluded, the
disguise, the brother and his disguise, the car, the pursuits? The confrontation, Jang-han being shot? Han and his control? The ruler deciding that he would stay? Escape to the beach house, the contact and his bringing the but, going to the shore, the princess walking, the man with the boat, the signalling to escape? The capture?

14. The aftermath with the princess, the arranged marriage, the status of her husband, his attempts to make the marriage work, the child? The death of the child? The divorce? The mental decline of the princess, be confined to an institution? The Japanese husband not allowed to go to Korea?

15. 1961, Jang-han working as a journalist, his contact with his friend is supplied the boat for the escape, his bar, customers, his information? Trying to discover the location of the princess? The meetings, the contacts? His travelling to Japan? Discovering the princess, in the institution, going to the room, contact, the gradual recognition? Taking her away?

16. Jang-han, his life, the contacts with the princess over the years, trying to help her escape, restoring her to Korea?

17. The return, the plane, the crowds, the women and their bowing in respect? After 38 years?

18. Information at the end – and the princess’s survival for many years?

A LONELY PLACE TO DIE

UK, 2011, 99 minutes, Colour.
Alec Newman, Melissa George, Ed Speleers, Kate Magowan, Holly Boyd, Douglas Russell, Sean Harris, Karel Roden, Eamon Walker.
Directed by Julian Gilby.

This is an atmospheric thriller, set in the highlands of Scotland, he mountain climbing story. The film opens with a sheer climb, dangers, the fall of one of the climbers and his being rescued.

The group recoups and others join the party for a second climb. They are delayed when they hear a voice in the woods, discover a pipe emerging from a dug-out hole and rescuing a young girl.

There are hunters in the woods but there are also two criminals who have been abducting children and holding them for ransom. They kill the hunters, take their rifles and then pursue the young girl and her rescuers. There are dangerous feats of climbing, falls, going into rivers, waterfalls… And there are quite a number of deaths.

Eventually, two of the rescuers reach the town, ask for the protection of the police, but there are shootouts, especially with the group of shooters acting on behalf of the father of the abducted girl – and he is a Serbian war criminal.

The film is somewhat pessimistic in tone with a number of deaths of “goodies” but there is basically a happy ending.

1. The title? Expectations? Thriller?

2. Scotland, the mountains, the scenery, the town, forest, waterfalls, rapids? The police in the town, the restaurant, homes, the festival celebration and procession? The musical score?

3. Plausibility and implausibility of the plot – pace and involvement?

4. The opening, the climb, the exhilaration, the scenery, the fall, the rescue, the aftermath? Alison and her blaming Ed? Cautioning him? The house, the hosts, the meal, playing cards, and winning?

5. The expedition, everyone going, hearing the sound, the ground, the pipe emerging? Opening the hole, the rescue of the girl? The dilemma about how to rescue her and get back to the town? The plan?

6. Harry and Allison, their skills, to go down the mountain, four miles to the police? Alison descending, the rope not long enough? Harry’s for, his rope having been cut? Alison going to the river?

7. The hunters, out in the mountains? The clash with the killers, the shooting, taking the guns? The pursuit of Allison? The pursuit the group?

8. Anna, her age, not speaking English, her fear? The mystery why she was there? Jenny, the feminine touch, helping, seizing? Jenny and her being dragged into the water, falling, drowning in the river? Alison rescuing Anna?

9. Alison, calling to the group, the killers and their pursuit of Alex, the confrontation, shooting him, his memory of his wife’s death and his accepting his own death?

10. Ed, an ambiguous character, his presence? His being hurt? His helping, he and Allison getting into the town?

11. The killers, this story, the past abductions? Going to the town, the restaurant? The leader of the recovery group, the bluff, the money? The contact by phone?

12. The recovery unit, their involvement, payment, motivation, students?

13. Ed and Alison, going to the police, suspicious of the officer, the police being shot, their escape, in the street, and being shot, his leg, left to die?

14. Alison and Anna, going to the house, the pursuit, the owner being killed, the pursuer setting fire, going upstairs, falling from the window?

15. The killer, his being taken, interrogated?

16. The father, criminal background, war crimes, suspicions, his daughter abducted, his getting the group to get her back?

17. The hospital, and, Alison, restoration?

18. The grim perspective – and so many been killed, not a completely happy ending?