GREENFINGERS

UK, 2000, 96 minutes, Colour.
Clive Owen, Helen Mirren, David Kelly, Warren Clark, Danny Dyer, Natasha Little, Lucy Punch.
Directed by Joel Hershman.




A pleasant, if slight British comedy.

It is based on actual characters which gives the whimsical tone a little more seriousness. As the title indicates, it is a film about gardening, about a prisoner who lives on resentment and surliness, who gets the opportunity to do something with his life through his greenfingered talent. Clive Owen (Croupier) is usually a sullen presence on screen and this is the way he starts off here. He has to share a cell with an old reformed murderer (David Kelly, the old man from Waking Ned) and is gradually mellowed by contact with him, especially when the first flowers grow.

Since this is a progressive prison, the governer is keen that the prisoners rehabilitate themselves through their creative work. A motley group of gardeners improve the gaol, go out on garden assistance, especially through the patronage of celebrity gardener (Helen Mirren) and her PR manager daughter (Natasha Little). While romance blossoms (as do the flowers), complications doom the attempt by the prisoners to prepare an exhibition for the Chelsea Flower Show.

But... An easygoing, undemanding comedy.


1. A pleasing small British comedy? Oddball situations, characters, interactions? And, despite being a prison film, niceness?

2. The British prison, the traditions of British prison films, the differences? The open prison, the role of the guards, fences, prisoners being on their honour? The prisoners liking it there? The jobs, allotted, prisoners finding that they liked jobs, achievements?

3. The settings of the prison, the local countryside, the gardens, the estate, the Hampton Court show? The musical score?

4. Colin as the focus of the story? His background, not wanting to talk about his crime, being released, missing prison and a petty crime to get back there? The governor and his role? The choice of Colin for the open prison? The touch of the sullen and his not choosing a job? The friendship with Fergus, patient with him? Fergus enthusiastic, giving the seeds to Colin, his carelessly sowing them? The result? The repercussions for Colin? Enjoying being a gardener, claiming this with the parole board? The development of the gardens, at the estate? The meeting with Georgina, her supervising the work, the plan for the show? Colin and the encounter with Primrose, her relationship with her mother, falling in love? And the final achievement?

5. Fergus, old, in prison for life, his view of life, friendship with the prisoners, the seeds for Colin? Encouraging him? The work with the gardens, the show?

6. The governor, his role, attitude, the open prison, dealing with the prisoners?

7. The range of prisoners, Tony, Raw, Jimmy, their work in the gardens, the effect on them, stealing, escaping – and the final explanation?

8. Georgina, her background, the touch of the haughty, skill with gardens, interest in the prisoners, working with them, the show, the day of the judging, success?

9. Primrose, her name, relationship with her mother, the encounter with Colin, falling in love – and a pleasing romance?

10. The benign glimpse of England, the touches of self-satire, the touches of sentiment – but with the expected British reserve?

BILL

UK, 2015, 94 minutes, Colour.
Matthew Baynton, Simon Farnaby, Martha Howe- Douglas, Jim Howick, Laurence Rickard, Ben Willbond, Helen Mc Crory, Damian Lewis.
Directed by Richard Bracewell.

The Bill of the title is William Shakespeare, a would-be lute player in the band, Mortal Coil (from whom he has to shuffle off) in Stratford-upon- Avon, married to Anne Hathaway, with his children. He writes plays and longs for a more successful career, going off to London, despite the protests from his wife.

This is not a biography – it is rather a Shakespearean version of the popular television series, Horrible Histories. While it has a substantial budget, recreates the Elizabethan period with some detail, including London and the court of Philip II in Madrid, it is a spoof, enjoyable for those who are on the wavelength, probably something of a mystery for those who over-reverence Shakespeare or do not understand this playing with history.

So, there is a great deal of potential for entertainment, checking in with history and the facts, moving towards interpretation, the comic perspective, and the role of satire.

This is the 1590s, and Elizabeth has been on the throne for some decades with another decade to go. She is presented as very haughty, moody, calculating – a performance by Helen Mc Crory, with dialogue going back to her father, Henry VIII, the intervention of Philip II of Spain who had married her half-sister, Mary, and the failure of the Armada.

We are taken to the court of Philip II, with Damian Lewis as an envoy who is arrested and tortured. it seems that diplomatic manoeuvres are in progress, with the ambassador to Elizabeth’s court but also the hiring of a group of assassins (all with comic touches on their way, including a cross-dresser who always wants the female parts). the entourage goes to the UK, lands on the coast, is exposed to Customs officials, but they fight, with corpses strewn on the beach. When they go to court, they intend to assassinate Elizabeth during the performance of a play.

One of the characters who turns up, full of self-importance and fanaticism against Catholics, searching for them everywhere, is Francis Walsingham.

The scenes of life in Stratford are entertaining, especially with Shakespeare and the band. On his way to London, he sees criminals held high in cages and gets directions from them only to find that he is almost instantly robbed. Going to an inn, he meets up with Christopher Marlowe, has a good talk, gets a gig where they both roam the streets with placards advertising vegetables – although Marlowe goes over to meat! Marlowe encourages Shakespeare, helps him write and changes the play.

Enter another character, the Earl of Croydon, very snobbish but disdained by fellow aristocrats. He drinks but is not accepted, goes to the court where he volunteers to write a play for Elizabeth’s celebration but finds it very difficult to do the lines. Another character is his servant on whom he relies – and who succeeds at the end.

At this stage, Anne Hathaway comes to London, is set upon in the streets and injured and is rescued by the Earl of Croydon. In his laments about the difficulties in writing a play, Anne volunteers the news that her husband writes plays. The play is accepted, as it is being performed there is a variation on the gunpowder plot and the Spaniards are exposed, especially with the loyalty of the cross-dressing actor transferring to Shakespeare.
For Shakespeare lovers, there are plenty of references to the plays and quotations – and some further amusement with the murder of Marlowe as a spy and his appearing as a ghost to encourage his friend Bill.

One of the main features of the film is that the very versatile cast perform in a wide range of different characters throughout.

INSIANG

Philippines, 1976, 95 minutes, Colour.
Hilda Koronel, Mona Lisa, Ruel Vernal, Rez Cortez, Marlon Ramirez, Nina Lorenzo.
Directed by Lino Brocka.

Insiang is one of the earlier films of celebrated Filipino director, Lino Brocka. It was screened at the 1976 Cannes Film Festival and won awards as it did locally.

The setting is Manila slums, a vivid opening sequence with detail of slaughter and management in an abattoir – perhaps visually suggestive of the drama that was to come. The film has Filipino sensibility, very emotional at times, with a touch of soap opera plot and responses, something characteristic of later Brocka films.

Hilda Koronel plays a teenage girl, the father abandoning his wife and daughter, her mother grown very severe and critical, even blaming her daughter. He takes up with a younger man who then has eyes for the daughter and seduces her. There is a great deal of gossip around that part of the district.

There are quite a number of boys, many unemployed, some with part-time jobs, sitting around, drinking, bragging, groping the girls. One of them is the boyfriend of Insiang to whom she turns after the seduction but he is feckless. The brother of her girlfriend offers support for which she is thankful – and perhaps will respond to her in the future.

The film moves to melodrama with Insiang getting revenge against the young man, his confessing his love to her and his plan for a new job, thinking the mother was not present, but she emerges and stabs him to death. Finale is at the prison, the mother seeming to refuse the outreach of her daughter and Insiang walking away but the mother with some emotion looking after her.

Lino Brocka had a gay sensibility and this emerges from many of the films that he was to make over the next 15 years before his untimely death.

1. The historical importance of the film, the Philippines and its industry, the 1970s, screening at Cannes, awards? Influence?

2. The work of the director, his perspective on the Philippines, on life in the Manila slums, men and women, sexuality, unemployment?

3. The locations, the homes, the slums, shops, the abattoirs, the markets, the streets? The musical score?

4. The sense of realism, situations, people, reactions? The plot, Filipino emotions, touches of the soap opera?

5. The introduction, the detailed work in the abattoirs, marketing? The workplace for the men of the area? Visual symbol of what was to follow?

6. The title, the focus on Insiang, age, relationship with her mother, her mother critical and demanding, the amount of housework, the shopping? The father abandoning his family and taking up with another woman? The mother blaming Insiang? Her friendship with the girl at the shop, chatting, trying the lipstick, but her friend eventually blaming her for the situation at home?

7. The young men, employment, unemployment, drinking, sitting around, boasting? Groping the girls? Going to the bar, playing billiards, gambling?

8. The mother, age, experience, hardship? Her husband walking out? The severity on her daughter, critical, demanding, physically hitting her? Her taking up with the younger man, his living in, the gossip in the district? The mother gambling with him?

9. Dado, age, experience, taking up with the mother, the relationship, sex, love? His eye on Insiang? Her resistance? His coming to her the night, the seduction, his continued declarations of love, critical of the mother? Getting a job in Cebu, wanting to move? His being stabbed to death – Insiang’s revenge, urging him on, provoking her mother?

10. Bebot, the boy around the town, investing, submissive to Dado, work in the garage, the attraction to Insiang, her going to him, the night in the hotel, his leaving, abandoning her, her getting him bashed?

11. Her girlfriend, support, Nanding and his devotion, mending things in the shop, his declaration to Insiang? Her gratitude?

12. Her mother arrested, Insiang going to visit her in prison, her embracing her, declaring her love, the mother and her hard expression? Insiang leaving, walking across the street – but
her mother looking after her?

13. Filipino slice of life?

ANOTHER PUBLIC ENEMY

Korea, 2006, 148 minutes, Colour.
Directed by Woo- Suk Kang.
A Korean film about two young boys, rivals at school, growing to adult hood, one becoming a prosecutor and the other, the rich young man, involved in shady business deals and murder.

Very long at almost 2 ½ hours but the film shows the psychological warfare between the two men, the arrogance of the criminal with his rich connections, laundering money through a golf education club in the United States, thinking he was untouchable. On the other hand, the film gives a great amount of time to the prosecutor, his working with his assistant lawyers, the revengeful motivation that the authorities pick up, his speaking with various authorities, with various thugs associated with the criminal, leading to a final confrontation.

1. A Korea in crime and law drama? The background of the two protagonists, at school, rivalry, the set up for the conflict in adult life?

2. The settings, the police, the world of business, the world of the rich, corruption, crime? The police team, the prosecutor, the assistants, investigations?

3. The setting up of the two boys, backgrounds, rivalries, games, violence, studies? The wealthy boy looking down on the poor boy? The poor boy, studious, making a decision to go and fight, the consequences? His family background?


4. The two men growing up, the boy becoming a prosecutor, his office, those working with him, taking them out for a meal, putting pressure? The authorities? Those approving his investigation? Those critical? The imputation of motives of revenge? How true?

5. The wealthy young man, the source of his wealth, the funds, his contact with the world of business, stand over the tactics, threats? His self-satisfaction? Organising deaths, gaining power and wealth?

6. The world of petty criminals, those associated with the rich young man, the interrogations, the three bound men with the prosecutor investigating, the rehearsed responses – and their being imprisoned at the end?

7. The world of the wealthy, Koreans society, the golf sequences, the laundering of the money in a golf school in the United States?

8. The prosecutor, becoming more involved, the meetings with his rival, the challenges? The arrests, interrogations?

9. The development of the case, the interactions between the two – and the final confrontation and success?

A MIDSUMMER NIGHT’S DREAM

UK, 2014, 95 minutes, Colour.
Nonzo Anozie, John Hannah, Maxine Peake, Matt Lucas, Eleanor Matsuura, Bernard Cribbins, Richard Wilson, Colin Mc Farlane, Kate Kennedy, Elaine Paige, Matthew Tennyson, Hiran Abeysekera, Charlotte Blake, Paapa Essiedu, Prisca Bakare.
Directed by David Kerr.


For more than 400 years there have been many performances of this Shakespearean play, filmed in 1935 by Max Reinhardt with a Hollywood cast, filmed in 1999 again with a Hollywood cast.

This version, pruned to 90 minutes, was made for television, utilising many cinematic techniques and effects, making it very different from the filmed stage version. The screenplay was written by Russell T. Davies, well-known British writer, especially for episodes of Dr Who.

Immediately, the audience senses quite a difference when Athens is presented as a more contemporary fascist state, uniforms, military guards, flags and hangings with fascist emblems. Theseus himself (John Hannah) is a tyrant, preparing for his wedding to the captive Hippolyta, brought in bound with the Hannibal Lecter like mask on her face. His assistant, Egeus, is also fascist in his behaviour, very concerned about his son, Demetrius, and his wooing of Hermia who is in love with the young man, Lysander. Helena, a rather gauche young woman to very good comic effect, taller than Demetrius, is nevertheless infatuated with him.

Then the magic begins with the appearance of a giant Oberon and his elves (Nonzo Anozie) and a confrontation with his queen, Titania (Maxine Peake) attended by her fairies. There is no love lost between the two and quite some expressions of antagonism and magical rivalry.

A key character in the play, of course, is Puck. He is at Oberon’s beck and call and commissioned to wreak some mischief leading to revenge on Titania, getting the potion, dropping it in her eyes as she slept, so that she would be enamoured of the first person that she saw on waking. Puck is also commissioned to put the drops in the eyes of the lovers who have now taken to the woods and encounter each other with some emotional tangles. this time, Puck makes a mistake.

In the woods, the two pairs of lovers encounter each other, and with the drops in their eyes, Lysander becomes infatuated with Helena and Demetrius with Hermia. There is quite a lot of comedy of errors in the speeches, declarations of love, declarations of disdain, taunting speeches. Interestingly, Hermia is played by an actress of African descent and Demetrius by a black actor. Lysander, on the other hand, is very white, with spectacles, something of a nerd. The tall Helena is an enjoyable gauche character.

In the meantime, those who were going to perform the play within the play assemble at a pub, The Mechanicals. Celebrated singer, Elaine Paige, is in charge of the casting and rehearsals with Matt Lucas as Bottom and veteran actors like Richard Wilson and Bernard Cribbins as part of the entourage. The scenes in the pub provide some comedy, especially with Bottom and his speeches, trying to make sense of the play with Pyramids and Thisbe as well is with the Lion, the Wall, and the comedy continues when they go out into the woods and all kinds of miscues during the rehearsal.

The action then focuses on Bottom and his being transformed by Puck into the ass, his encounter with Titania, her being enraptured by him, his response – and Oberon and the elves enjoying her discomfort.

Eventually, the play within the play takes place in the Castle, Theseus presiding. One of the modern touches is that Theseus’ advisor has an iPad and is able to watch what is going on – with Theseus disgusted with a lot of the performances and the exaggerations and putting a red cross on his iPad for their executions. Hippolyta is brought in, still bound. Theseus then has an attack, leaves the hall after his disparaging comments on the play and the players but is seen having a physical turn and collapsing.

Hippolyta is released and it turns out that she is a fairy and rises up with Titania.

The writer, Russell T. Davies, is noted for introducing gay and lesbian themes into his adaptations – evident here when, at one stage, Lysander wakens the first person he sees is Demetrius and is attracted to him; when Hippolyta is released, she embraces Titania; and, amongst the guards and the mechanicals, there is a gay couple dancing.

This version preserves the core of the text but also shows how the action and characterisation is enhanced by visual ingenuity.

SULLY

US, 2016, 95 minutes, Colour.
Tom Hanks, Aaron Eckhart, Laura Linney, Jamey Sheridan, Mike O' Malley.
Directed by Clint Eastwood.

Many of us will remember the story from January 2009 from New York City, the plane that landed on the Hudson River, safely, with no loss of life. Many will remember that the nickname of the captain was Sully, and his name was Capt Chesley Sullenberger. Here is the story.

We are used to aviation stories on screen. We are used to aviation danger stories on screen. we have seen many many crashes. This is the opportunity to see a plane coming down and not crashing, as Capt Sullenberger insists to the examination board, of a plane not going into the river, but a plane on the river. There is a linguistic difficulty of saying landing because we don’t have a word for this kind of event like watering…

And who better to portray this serious gentleman of the year, clear-thinking, calm-reacting pilot with 42 years flying experience, from farm planes, military, to commercial airlines, and Tom Hanks? With white hair and moustache, he has a rather patrician bearing as he goes about his work, as he saves the day, helps in the orderly evacuation of the plane, is concerned about numbers of survivors, prepares to go to a board examining what he did, challenging the information provided by simulations with similar data to what he experienced, hailed a hero by the media and by passers-by in the street – and, ultimately vindicated and praised.

Speaking of the elderly and their abilities, the film has been directed by Clint Eastwood at the age of 85, along an exceptional career not only in performance but in film direction, winning two Oscars, and, since his 70th birthday, providing a long list of top cinema entertainments.

The structure of the film is something of a challenge, starting with Sully and his dreams of what might’ve happened, memories of 9/11 only seven and a bit years earlier, introducing the character, the appearance before a board, flashbacks about his past, and phone calls to his wife – Laura Linney with sequences only on phone calls. The actual experiences kept to the middle of the film the actual experiences kept.

Capital happened rather quickly, the plane taking off from La Guardia airport on its way to shop Charlotte, North Carolina, almost immediately running into a flock of birds, the engine is failing, altitude lowering, contact with flight control and recommendations to return to the airport or tried landing in New Jersey, with Sully estimating that the safest thing was to try to go down on the river. As he says at the end, the whole episode was saved by the combined work of his co-pilots, played by Aaron Eckhart, the flight attendants who keep their calm, the cooperation of the passengers in disembarking, the speedy response of Hudson River ferries, of helicopters and divers, rescuing people from the water, from the life rafts and the number of people standing on each wing.

The examination board is portrayed as rather severe on Sully, implying that he should have turned back to La Guardia and could have reached it, relying on several simulation exercises – But Sully reminds them that it was not a simulation but reality, that there was some time needed to weigh up the alternatives, something omitted by the simulations.

The film runs for only 95 minutes but it keeps the attention with its characters, especially Sully, with the media response, Sully becoming a hero on an ordinary working day in the US, the reconstruction of the flight and the response of authorities, the public and the media.

1. Audience knowledge of the incident on the Hudson River? Information, characters, aviation background, the role of the media, the official enquiry?

2. The contribution of Tom Hanks, his status in Hollywood, the elderly statesman presence? Clint Eastwood, his career, directing this film at age 85?

3. A true story, the appearances of media personalities like Katie Couric and David Letterman as themselves? The coverage of the incident, the interviews? The actual personages including Sully and their appearing during the final credits?

4. Audience response to stories about planes and aviation, passenger safety, pilot experience – 42 years, crop flights, military flights, commercial flights, a safety record? The possibilities for accidents, birds? The training for accidents, the role of the pilots, the flight attendants, the failure of engines, the role of flight control? The human element and human decisions – and the timing?

5. Introduction to Sully, his nightmares, the plane flying through central Manhattan, the echoes of 9/11?

6. Sully, his age, his experience as a pilot, the flashbacks? Called before the boards, the panel, critical, the grilling, the implications of failure? The reaction to his appearances on media? His requests for access to the simulation screenings, his putting pressure on friends? The simulation hearings, Sully being calm, Jeff and his support?

7. The personal aspect of Sully’s life, the phone calls to his wife, details of life, her fears, his daughters? The financial situation?

8. The media and the response, making him a hero, the replays, the interviews, for and against, the David Letterman show?

9. Sully and his anxiety, in the hotel, going for the walk, with Jeff, the run? Going to the bar, the bar keeper recognising him, the naming of a drink after him? Goose with a dash of water? His memories, the training, the 42 years, remembering the plane and the preparation for the trip to Charlotte, the glimpses of passengers, the elderly, the father and his two sons, arriving just in time?

10. The focus on flight control, the handler, his concern, his being in the room and not knowing about the success?

11. The audience seeing the actual episode in the middle of the film, the effect? Take off, the destination, an ordinary flight, the sudden encounter with the flock of birds, the engines, fire, disabled, loss of altitude, the role of the wings, contact with flight control, their advice, the alternate landing strips in La Guardia and New Jersey? Sully and his decision about the river? Landing (rivering/watering) on the river? The passengers, their fears, the flight attendants, urged to brace, the lights going out, on the water? The water coming in? January, the cold, the temperatures? So few hurt? The orderly getting out, life rafts, some passengers in the water, the helicopter rescues? Standing on the wings? The role of the ferries, the pilots and the crew? Saving everyone? The speed with which the operation was completed?

12. The role of the authorities, the mayor of New York, the union representative? Sully, wet, concerned to know the survival numbers? At the hotel, the welcome reception, clothes, things being brought, getting ready for the hearing?

13. The hearing, the importance of the simulations, the return to La Guardia, the board and the public hearing reaction? Sully contradicting, talking about the human element, the time for decisions? The adding of 35 seconds to the simulation, the pilots and their 17 attempts for the simulation? The ultimate failure, reactions? The board, the congratulations? People’s acclaim?

14. American heroics on an ordinary weekday and its effect?

GIRL ASLEEP

Australia, 2015, 77 minutes, Colour.
Bethany Whitmore, Harrison Feldman, Matthew Whittet, Amber McMahon?, Eamon Farren, Tilda Cobham- Hervey.
Directed by Rosemary Myers.

This film began its life as a play, a story about a teenage girl, but written by a male playwright who also adapted the script for the screenplay here – and plays the part of the father of the girl asleep, Matthew Whittet.

The film has received quite a lot of very strongly favourable reviews and has won some awards. But not everyone has been caught up in its comedy and it’s a drama – and its veering into fantasy.

The film will have more appeal to female audience, into teenage audiences interested in and perhaps identifying with the central character, Bethany Whitmore. Mothers will also be interested, making comparisons with their daughters and adolescent struggles.

The setting is the 1970s, home in suburbia, school. we are introduced to Greta, the younger daughter in her family, moving from somewhere else and at school the school for the first time, approached by a nerdy young student, Elliott (Harrison Feldman) and approached by a group of Mean Girls who make demands that she moved with them. Greta is more than a little passive at this stage and complies but also apologises later to get.

Meanwhile, back at home, her mother and father are keen to host a 15th birthday party for her, something which she does not want it all. For me, she has an older sister in she can confide and who gives her good advice. Eventually, Greta agrees but is dismayed at the party dress that her mother takes her out in. At the party, many of the school students arrive with gifts, making Greta somewhat over laden. And Elliott arrives all suited up.So, we can this story go from here?

From quirky and some deadpan situations into a whole realm of fantasy, with some of the wild things are or seem to be. Greta goes into a rather dark forest wonderland, encountering characters who encourage, who told, who confuse – and are played by the actors who portray her parents, her sister’s boyfriend, talking with Elliott’s voice, as well as a benign kind of fairy, female guide. For a puzzling audience, what happens is not always clear – frequently not clear, so the best thing is to surrender to the fantasy, observed Greta and see what the experience of being lost, chased, warned, encouraged leads to.

One of the things it does lead to is a bit of rebellion on Greta’s part and her persuading Elliott, whom she has insulted by suggesting that people say he is gay but has apologised, to give her his suit to wear and feed to wear her dress. Done.The party continues and the film suggests that Greta has gone through something of a rite of passage and will come out well at the other end.

1. The title, the focus on Greta, her age, her fears, her family, her fantasies?

2. The suburban settings, home, school? The contrast with the fantasy sequences, the forest, the characters, the atmosphere? The musical score, the songs? The lyrics and their comment on character and action?

3. Greta’s story, 14, going on 15, her place in the family, relationship with her mother and father, with her older sister and her confidences? The move? Going to the school, new to the area? The atmosphere, the period, school uniforms? Her sitting alone on the bench, Elliott coming to talk with her, her awkwardness, yet her interest in him? The three girls, the Mean Girls approach, demanding that Greta move with them? Her going off, later apology to Elliott?

4. At school, learning, at home, her parents and their expectations? The characters, work, joviality? The plan for a party? Greta not wanting it?

5. The pressure on Greta, the discussions with Elliott, with the girls? Her agreeing to have the party?

6. The preparations, the dress and her not wanting it? The father, his enthusiasm? The mother, her wanting the party, the glamour? The invitations?

7. The party, Greta and the dress, her sister supporting her, the parents dressing up? The guests arriving, saying hello, the gifts? The range of fellow-students? Elliott’s arrival, the suit? The music, the dancing, her parents’ enthusiasm?

8. Greta withdrawing, talking with Elliott, hhis talk about friendship, the advance for the kiss, her reaction, insinuation that he was homosexual, his taking offence?

9. Greta, lying down, going to sleep?

10. The dream, the screen time devoted to it, audiences able to identify with Greta and her puzzles, her quest? Identifying with Greta in the forest? The dim forest, the perils, the touch of the Grimms’ Fairy Tales? Greta herself, her quest, being lost, the trees, the dark, the water, her becoming enveloped?

11. Range of characters, threatening, welcoming? Male and female? The ambiguities? Greta’s father and his character, the mother and her appearance, her sister’s boyfriend, the French background, his talking with the voice of Elliott? The interchange of voices? The benign character, a guide, wisdom, helping Greta? The appearance of the Mean Girls and their influence, at the party, their reactions?

12. The effect of the dream, the change in Greta, more self-acceptance? Her sister urging her to go down to the party? Her apology to Elliott? Seeing everyone again and becoming involved in the party? Her changing into Elliott’s suit and his changing into her dress?

13. A symbolic coming-of-age story? The male writer of the play and screenplay? The women performing, directing? The impact for parents, for teenagers, for teenage girls like Greta?

CAPTAIN FANTASTIC

US, 2016, 118 minutes, Colour.
Viggo Mortensen, George Mac Kay, Frank Langella, Ann Dowd, Samantha Isler, Annalise Basso, Nicholas Hamilton, Kathryn Hahn, Steve Zahn, Erin Moriarty, Missi Pyle.
Directed by Matt Ross.

Beware, the title of this film is quite misleading. It does give the indication that this is a film about a superhero. But, it is definitely not. It is a film about a family, living in the wild, living an ideology that prepares them for some of the trials of life but, could be ultimately damaging.

The setting is impressive, the camera in the opening sequence flying over thick forest, trees upon trees, a beautiful wilderness. Then there is a young man, hidden in the undergrowth, stalking a deer which he then kills, is congratulated by his father for becoming a man, anointed with the blood, consuming part of the entrails, a ritual of rites of passage to adulthood.

And so we are introduced to a family with six children, the father present but the mother hospitalised with a mental condition. This is a family, but audiences will be reminded at various times of life in a cult. The family is separated from any town, lives in a wooden house and tents, with the day started in strong discipline, physical exercises, running through the forest – and sometimes exercises climbing a mountain face and, even with an accident and a fall, the encouragement to will oneself out of the difficulty and use physical and mental ingenuity.

The training is not just physical. The children are encouraged to read extensively. and they absorb what they read, even the youngest of the children who, at a later invitation when visiting cousins in New Mexico, to be able to recite the Bill of Rights. Audiences who admire this alternative life, watch father and children sitting around a campfire, singing, communing, reading, may still wonder whether this is enough, especially for the contemporary world – or are they to be separated from it all together?
Viggo Mortensen, always a powerful screen presence, is commanding as the father, Ben. He is both benign and strict, making demands on his children but always thinking of their betterment. There are three boys and three girls, George MacKay? as the oldest initiated boy, two sisters coming after him, another boy who has the touch of the rebel and then two small children.

A situation arises as to whether they should go to their mother’s funeral – at first deciding not, especially when her father warns them off, disapproving of their way of life, of his daughter becoming part of this life, rebelliously anti-Christian in her stances and embracing Buddhist principles.

The latter part of the film raises questions about the children and their upbringing, the strengths, especially when they visit their mother’s sister, her husband and children, the children not understanding the way of life of their cousins at all, and the aunt being very disapproving of Ben’s frank straightforwardness in talking about his wife’s illness and death, of physical and sexual matters, preferring truth above all.

The crisis comes at the funeral, a Catholic funeral, the eulogising priest not having met the mother and Ben taking this as a cue to intervene in the ceremony, declaring that his wife wanted to be cremated.

Jack, Frank Langella, heartily disapproves of Ben and offers to look after the children. An accident brings the issues to a head, and Ben’s realising that what he has done is to prepare his children for any physical situation, has filled their heads with knowledge but has not trained them emotionally to deal with the world and with other people. This has been illustrated on the bus trip to New Mexico for the funeral where the oldest boy encounters an attractive teenage girl and analyses the situation, not realising what was happening to him emotionally.

Which means that the film raises a lot of issues about quality of life, of a wilderness life, but not the modern convenience life, of intellectual information, of realistic emotions, of the nature of parenting, of forming children in the parents’ likenes, of the need for children’s autonomy and, ultimately, making their own decisions.

1. The title, expectations, realism rather than fantasy?

2. The locations in Washington State, the vast opening with the forests, the waterfalls, the family hunting, the house and tent, life in the wild? Idealistic?

3. The contrast with the towns, modern situations, phones? The travel on the bus, on the roads? Moving from north to south, to New Mexico, homes, church, the modern world? The final home – in between the wild and the mansion?

4. The tone, the oldest son and his hunting, stalking the deer, killing the deer, an initiation, becoming an adult, the blessing of his father, consuming the entrails? Skinning the deer?

5. The father, his age, experience, love for his wife, the plan to live in the wild together? Her Buddhist beliefs? The staunch anti-Christian stances? Her illness, mental condition, moods, the concern, her slitting her wrists?

6. The regime at the house, early rising, exercises, the training, runs, climbing the mountain face, coping with accidents and continuing? The meals? The evening around the fire, the camp situation, playing musical instruments, the intense meeting of the drum,, reading, the amount of learning from each of the children, information and ability to recite their knowledge?

7. The oldest son, his age, leadership? Yet his application for the University, his father disappointed, the revelation that his mother helped him? The two older girls, together, martial arts, singing? The young son and his continued questioning, the touch of the rebel? Two youngest children, eccentric costumes, knowledgeable, appearing naked? Everyone and the love for their mother?

8. The news of her death, the father going to the town, the phone call? The effect on all of them, the phone call to Harper, to Jack and his wife, the reactions? Jack and his hostility?

9. Deciding not to go to the funeral, the reasons to go, the decision, in the bus, the interiors, the cabins, the bookshelves? All together in the spirit of the bus?

10. Arriving at Harper’s house, her relationship with her sister, her husband and the boys? Mod cons? The boys, such a contrast with the wild children? Their ignorance, the little girl and her knowledge of the Bill of Rights? The father, Harper and her reaction, his talking about his wife’s illness, the slitting of the wrists, Harper not wanting such talk? His Frank talk about sexuality? The reactions, his apology?

11. During the trip, the camping, the oldest son, the encounter with the young girl, her mother, attractive, his awkwardness, thinking that he was in love, the kiss, the parents’ reactions?

12. The funeral, the father in red, the children arriving, the priest of the church and his eulogy, but not knowing the dead woman, the father taking this as a cue to speak, his frankness about his wife’s attitude, the Catholic setting, her Buddhism, anti-Christian stances, fictions? The reaction of Jack, the ushers, the father being ousted? Wanting a cremation? The waiting?

13. Jack, his wealth, status, religion? Severity with his son-in-law? Harper and her husband, their reaction after the funeral?

14. In the house, the plan, going to the cemetery, digging up the corpse, taking it, the cremation, and the mother’s wish to be flushed down the toilet?

15. The rebel son, going into the house, with his grandparents, games and his grandfather teaching him how to hunt? Jack, his threats, the effect? The attempt to rescue the boy, the girl, on the roof, her falling, in hospital? A challenge to the family to come to some kind of compromise?

16. The reactions, the father’s reaction to his son going to the University? The fact that his wife supported this?

17. The reassessment, the Father, the children and their head knowledge, the need for contact with the world, realism? Jack and his wife offering to care for the children?

18. On their own, the compromise, the reality of knowledge, emotions, the world, the ideal and the real? The older son and his decision to go to Namibia for experience?

19. The effect of the experiment? Akin to something of a cult? The family at the end, their home, the meals, children going to school – in some type of normality?

DON’T BREATHE

US, 2016, 88 minutes, Colour.
Jane Levy, Dylan Minette, Stephen Lang, Daniel Zovatto.
Directed by Fede Alvarez.



Unfortunately, any thriller that seems to have a sense of menace, many fans will think of as a horror movie and, if it doesn’t have blood and gore, if it doesn’t have a lot of special effects, even a touch of the supernatural, they are very disappointed. As has happened with some audiences for this one.

However, most audiences who seek and don’t Read, I’m more than satisfied – they have accepted it not as horror but as a terror film, terror for the characters involved, and a sense of increasing tension and terror for the audience themselves.

The film runs from under 90 minutes but is quite compact and generally quite taut. the premise is quite a straightforward one. Three young people take part in a series of burglaries, grabbing what they can, with touches of vandalism, and then trying to get rid of the goods via a local fence. He urges them, if they want cash, to steal cash and that gives them agenda for the next robbery.

The background is to treat, a city in collapse, with a lot of the settings here dilapidated buildings, abandoned houses, derelict streets. It also gives each of the three something in the background story, especially the girl, Roxy (Jane Leavy) who has difficulties at home, a slatternly mother and her boyfriend, and the young sister who would love to live near the surface. one complex one the Congress, Alex (Dylan Minette) is a bit wary of the robberies, does not want to go to California as Roxy does, gets information on houses from his insurance father in the case out house, a man who has received cash in a damages case, but whom they discover is blind. What could be more straightforward than getting into his house, finding the cash and escaping?

Will, of course, it doesn’t go like that at all, and that makes the process always interesting, always tense, the three discovering that the blind man is not exactly helpless and that while they might get the money, it is not a sure thing to get out of the house. One of the interesting features of the screenplay is that there are a variety of terms and developments in the plot, some quite unforeseen, which makes the morality of the stealing as well is of the blind man much more ambiguous.

Stephen Lang is particularly effective as the blind man, using all his senses to make him alert, realising the presence of the three burglars – even though they force themselves to be quiet and obey the title of the film, Don’t Breathe.

As far as home invasion stories go, this one is pretty good, quite a moral issue being raised, unexpectedly, towards the end of the film – and leaving the audience with some uncertainties about the future.

1. A well-made terror film? taut, developing turns throughout the film? The overall impact?

2. The plausibility of the plot, even the seemingly implausible possible?

3. The Detroit settings, the deterioration, the empty buildings, the slums, the streets, ordinary homes? The film and its focus inside the house, the variety of rooms, stairs, ducts, cellar, the imprisonment of the captive? The use of the confined spaces, credible action? Atmospheric score?

4. Introduction to Roxy, Alex, Money, in the house, stealing everything, urinating on the floor, breaking the window? Conscienceless?

5. Alex, his father, researching homes and insurance? Information about the blind man’s house? Alex changing his mind, not wanting to go to California, deciding to go? Money, his name, tattoos, amoral? Roxanne, at home, the slatternly mother, the boyfriend, drinking, the little girl, Roxy and her hard life, her mother assuming that she was a prostitute? The little girl, wanting to serve, Roxy promising to take her to California? Some motivation for the robbery?

6. The initial image, the woman dragged along the street – and the repetition at the end with its entire implications?

7. Watching the house, seeing the blind man, the decision that it would be easy to rob him? The vast amount of cash? The plans to get into the house, Alex and his machine to stop the security? The difficulty in opening the door? The experience of the dog, evading it? Roxy and the breaking of the window, getting in, finding the security in time, opening the door?

8. Money, his gas machine, going upstairs, the blind man in bed, the television? The struggle? His turning on the gas? Presuming the man had been gassed?

9. The search for the cash, the locked door, Money and the gun, the others and their reaction to the gun, the danger in being arrested, armed burglary? The blind man coming in, the fight with Money, the shots, Money dead?

10. Alex wanting to go home because of the gun, not getting out, Roxy hiding in the closet, the communication by texting?

11. The tension building up in the house, the two not breathing, the board creaking, the suspicions of the blind man? Roxy seeing the safe, the number, opening it, getting the money out, putting it in her bag? Carrying the bag through the ordeal? The blind man opening it and finding the money gone?

12. The dangers in the house, from room to room, the pursuit of the dog, the attacks?

13. Going to the basement, the discovery of the captive, the newspaper and her story, the motivation of the blind man, his daughter dead in the accident, the woman pronounced not guilty of manslaughter, his capturing her? Their freeing her, the blind man coming down, the shots – and her death?

14. The attacks on Alex, wounded, yet surviving, at the window, on the glass? The irony of the shears, the audience think it was Alex but actually the corpse of Money?

15. Roxy in the ducts, climbing through, the pursuit by the dog, the dog at the window?

16. The two together, Roxie taken, bashed, tied up like the captive?

17. The blind man’s revelation about his daughter, the plan for Roxie’s pregnancy, the semen, Alex attacking, it going into the blind man’s mouth? Their tying him up?

18. The final attack Alex, his death? Roxy getting out of the house, escaping the man, finding the dog pursuing her, getting into the car, the attacks by the dog, closing up the window, the money satchel outside? Her remembering her story about the ladybug and her mother putting her in the trunk of the car, opening it up, luring the dog in, trapping the dog inside?

19. The men pursuing Roxy, her attack on him, his injuries? Running away?

20. Taking her sister to California, their bags, the terminal? The television news – the blind man surviving, the assumption that there were two burglars only, but his being able to survive and give information?

21. The different moral perspectives, changes of sympathies, issues of truth and justice – and are sufficiently moral ambiguity at the end for the man and for Roxy?

THE INFILTRATOR

US, 2016, 126 minutes, Colour.
Bryan Cranston, John Leguizamo, Benjamin Bratt, Diane Kruger, Juliet Aubrey, Olympia Dukakis, Amy Ryan, Jason Isaacs, Yul Vazquez, Art Malik, Michael Pare, Elena Anaya, Said Taghmaoui.
Directed by Brad Furman.

How can they do it? And why?

These are two questions that this film raises. How can men and women go undercover, the deception that they have created, no matter how significant the motivation, the perennial risks and dangers, the false relationships that they have to establish and maintain which involve betrayal and emotional damage?

As can be seen from the title, this is a story about such undercover work. it is based on the memoir of Robert Mazur, the protagonist of the story, his memories of his undercover work on behalf of American agencies, especially in the 1980s and the spread of cocaine smuggling, the huge importations to the US, the traffic from Colombia and the influence of Pablo Escobar. Bryan Cranston gives a strong performance as Mazur, though, despite the darkened hair and moustache, he does seem too old for the role and the character.

It is 1985, in Florida. The film recreates the period, the look, clothing, the music and songs of the period. It opens with Mazur, in disguise, involved in an exchange of drugs and money followed by a raid. He is suffering from a wound and is entitled to retire, the authorities offering him the possibility but his refusing. He has connections with another officer, Hispanic, Abreu, played with a cheeky bravura by John Leguizamo. He has some local informants and the point is made that the agents should follow the money trails rather than the drug trails. The two set up a project, false names and documents, a dummy bank, making connections with some of the local drug dealers, especially those in the Escobar organisation, overcoming suspicions, beginning to launder money and gaining a reputation that leads them to crooked bankers in Panama and, eventually in France and England.

In the meantime, Robert Mazur has a loving wife, Evelyn, and two children. There are a number of domestic sequences and Mazur’s wife’s support for him in his work.

And the difficulty arises when one of the locals hosts Bob at a bar and procures a prostitute for him – Bob improvising with an excuse that he has a fiancee. This means that the agency head, played by Amy Ryan, has to organise an agent who can join Bob as his fiance, Kathy. She is played by Diane Kruger, a professional agent, who is challenged also in her undercover work, keeping up the facade of the happy engaged couple even when it leads them to New York City and friendship with a significant dealer, played by Benjamin Bratt, and his wife.

The audience is constantly tense along with Bob and Kathy as they live their dangerous second life.

The engagement become significant and authorities decide that the wedding date should go ahead and that all their contacts should be invited to the wedding, the deception being so convincing that everyone accepts. Then the raid.

As with so many true stories, there are photos of the principal characters during the final credits, information about those arrested and their sentences, as well as of Bob Mazur and his family – and the surprise that he has continued his undercover work in succeeding decades.

1. A true story? The 1980s? The drug situation? Columbia, Escobar? The American agencies? Undercover work?

2. The re-creation of the period, Florida, costumes and decor? The musical score, the songs? Home, bars, clubs, offices, Panama and the banks, sequences in Paris?

3. The title, the author and his memoir, his life, character, work, family, dangers, risks, achievement?

4. Robert Mazur, Bryan Cranston’s performance? The introduction, in the bar, undercover, flirting with the waitress, drug currency, the exchange of drugs, the bust and the arrests?

5. At home, with his wife, children, normal, his wife’s acceptance of his work, yet the tensions, love, family life, his being wounded, the possibility for him to retire, the interviews with the authorities, his not retiring?

6. Abreu, intruding into the house, his ideas, undercover work, out jogging, the idea of following the cash rather than the drugs?

7. Bonni Tischler, the other authorities, local, Washington, agreement with Robert’s principles, the details of changing his identity, the banker? Abreu and the informants, the cash, the contacts? The meetings? The Colombians and their testing out Bob, Bob as a banker, Abreu and his role, cultivating friends, jovial, making the project credible? The Colombians
tentative, the cheques, the amounts, the money-laundering? Bob and success, getting a name?

8. Introduction to Espinosa, his manner, the tattooed assistant, effete, his role, the sexual innuendo, Bob’s reaction?

9. Further talks, meetings, clubs, the informants and their sexual behaviour, organising the prostitute for Bob, his explanation that he had a fiancee?

10. Bonni Tischler and her reaction, choosing Kathy as the fiancee, in herself, her work, living up to her role, keeping up the impressions, effective? A later visit to Evelyn to get Bob’s suit for the wedding? Her reassuring Evelyn?

11. The toll on Bob, the deceptions, undercover, the personal contacts, the emotional consequences? Abreu with the informants, mixing with them, sleazy situations, holding the man who was shot, the effect on him, yet his bravura?

12. Bob, the Panama contacts, the phone calls, the visit, explaining the benefits, the personalities of the men in Panama, testing, their acceptance, the meetings? The nature of the deals?

13. Bob and the contact with Roberto, his importance in the organisation? Pleasant but able to profit from the drug situation? The visit to New York, Roberto and Gloria, the daughter, the apartment, their life, the friendship, socialising, the shopping, the gift of the jewels, Roberto and his comment on previous betrayals?

14. The consequences for Bob and Kathy, putting forward the wedding, inviting all the contacts to the wedding?

15. The build-up, Bob and his visit to Paris, the money-laundering in Paris, the contacts? The meetings, the decision to go to London? The importance of the British connection, the bank – and its ultimate exposure, collapse?

16. The contacts from Washington, the plan, the wedding, the invitations, the arrangements?

17. The date of the wedding, getting ready, Kathy and her dress, the crowd, all the visitors, including Roberto? The beginning of the ceremony, the priest?

18. The signal, the detail of the raids, the arrests, Gloria and her anger, Roberto and his sense of betrayal? The bankers and their shock? Having to hand in the profits, Kathy giving up the pearls? The success of the project?

19. The information given at the end, the success of the undercover work, the blow to Escobar and the Colombians, the information about the CIA and its dealings and building up of funds, the breakup of banking institutions?

20. The photos of the actual characters at the end – and the information that Robert continued with his undercover work?