CERTAIN WOMEN

US, 2016, 107 minutes, Colour.
Laura Dern, Michelle Williams, Kristin Stewart, Lily Gladstone, Jared Harris, René Auberjoniois, James Le Gros, John Getz.
Directed by Kelly Reichardt.

With the last decade, American director, Kelly Reichardt, has developed something of a cult reputation. She takes offbeat stories by Maile Meloy, writing the screenplays, directing, editing, with a strong focus on central women characters. Her films include Wendy and Lucy, a film about pioneering in the West Meek’s Cut-off, the environmental thriller Night Moves. A frequent comment is that she has a minimalist style.

This is very evident in Certain Women. What makes it more interesting is that the film has three short stories in one, each focusing on a different woman, and a different style in the telling of each story.

In the first film, Laura Dern plays a lawyer whose husband has left her. She is engrossed in her work, has a persistent client, Jared Harris, who is obsessed with his legal rights, feeling that they have been denied, who pesters her, who goes into the legal office to find his files, taking a hostage, with the police relying on Laura to talk him down. This takes its toll on her – and, in a postscript to the film, we see something of the repercussions. The setting is a small town, the audience following the train coming into the town and immersing themselves in Laura’s story and her experiences.

Then there is a transition to the story of Gina, Michelle Williams, who has appeared in a number of Kelly Reichardt’s films. This story also has a small focus, Gina and her husband spending a weekend going to the house of an old-timer, listening to his story, wanting to buy the pile of stone on his property so that they can use it in the house that they are building. James Le Gros plays the husband and veteran René Aubergenois is the old man. The complications are in Gina’s moods and in her trying to deal with her restless daughter who is not the least bit interested in the house and is caught up with friends and social media.

There is more detail in the third story, that of Jamie, Lily Goldstone, who has a way with horses and trains them on a property. By chance, she goes to town and follows a group of people into an adult education course. It is being run by Beth, Kristin Stewart, who has to travel a long way for the course and return home that night, finding the focus of the group fixed on their particular problems rather than on school and legal law which she is trying to communicate. Jamie, however, is fascinated and returns to the course and is very disappointed when Beth decides to give it up and a substitute teacher arrives. Jamie is attracted to Beth, in need of a friend, and she drives all night to Beth’s town in order to meet her.

So, the film is a portrait of three different women, sketches really, but effectively done, with some empathy, enabling the audience to appreciate the women, the comparative smallness of their lives, but the significance for themselves.

1. A film based on short stories? Three stories in one? Portraits? Women? The role of men? The endings?

2. The train going into Montana, the look of the rails, the town, life, the radio, contemporary, legal offices, shops and malls, parking areas? The country towns? Homes, farms, horses? Adult education? Musical score?

3. The director and her career, suggestions that she uses minimalist approaches to stories and communication?

4. Laura’s story, age, Ryan leaving at the opening of the film (no mention later)? The work, busy, the law, the encounter with Fuller, his situation, injury, the effects and consequences, his suing, the company resisting, Laura and her involvement, the appointment, watching him go? Consultation legal expert, no hope for redress? The wandering in the mall, her sitting in the car, the driver, his threats about his wife and shooting people? His getting out of the car? At home, the television? Woken up, the hostage situation, the Samoan and his links to the royal family and Samoa? Fuller with the gun, talking? The police, the vest for Laura, the plan, her going in, finding the files, reading them to Fuller, the talk, his not allowing her to answer the phone? The plan, his getting out, her information to the police, his arrest, watching him go?

5. The end, Laura to visit to the prison, the gift of the shake, his having no grudge, the story of his wife and correspondence with a man in prison, marriage? Life in prison, resignation, noisy? Her future?

6. Gina, married to Ryan, the difficulties with their teenage daughter? Her age, the plan for building the house, away for the weekend, the tent? Her daughter criticising her? The father pleasant? The daughter staying in the car, not wanting to meet Albert? Albert, his age, house, talking, the sale of the rocks, his pondering, his reminiscences, the building and history of the house? Gina strong, Ryan leaving things open? Leaving? The work and the transfer of the rocks to the truck?

7. The ending, the pile of rocks, the prospects?

8. Jamie, life on the farm, looking after the horses, opening the door each day, the vista, riding out with the bales of hay, feeding the horses? The dog? Her life, loner? Seeing the group and following it into the adult education class? The theme of the class, school law? The teachers and their concerns about students, expulsions, parking? Beth, arrival, explanations, driving four hours there and back, at work the next day, the nature of the job? The handouts and information? Jamie talking to her, going to the diner, the beginnings of the friendship, Beth and her story, education, family, selling shoes, the law? Several visits to the diner? Jamie turning up with a horse, their riding to the diner? Beth not turning up, the new teacher, Jamie walking out, driving, searching for Beth, around the city? Meeting her, the discussions, any future? Jamie’s emotions, friendship, attachment? The Jamie going back home, asleep at the wheel, veering off the road?

9. The end, everything going back to normal?

10. Perceptive slices of life? Feminine perspective?

PERSONAL SHOPPER

France, 2015, 105 minutes, Colour.
Kristen Stewart, Lars Eidinger, Sigrid Bouaziz, Anders Danielson Lie, Ty Olwin, Nora von Waldstatten.
Directed by Olivier Assayas.

Strongly divided opinions about this one. It was greeted by boos at the critics’ screening at the Cannes film Festival, but then it did win the Best director award for Olivier Assayas.

Kristin Stewart, who had previously worked successfully with Assayas in Clouds of Sils Maria, is Maureen, the personal shopper of the title.She works for a temperamental actress, at her beck and call, but seemingly willing to do this work. There are quite a number of sequences where she goes to shops to pick up a range of clothes for her employer – and revealing a growing interest in the clothes and the possibilities of trying them on, of wearing them.

But, this is not the main focus of the film. she has some psychic powers, the sense of the presence of powers from the beyond, the possibility of ghosts. We see her spending the night in a house trying to get a sense of whether there are mysterious persons present – which brings her in contact with a number of celebrities who are interested in her powers. There is also a murder.

While Maureen herself has something of a personal life and relationships, she spends a lot of her time alone, going on trips, even to London, for personal shopping. Gradually, there are eerie aspects of her life, sensing of other people, much of it centring on the experience of the death of her brother – and something of his restlessness in the afterlife.

In the meantime, she goes to visit her boyfriend who is working in Morocco in IT.

Over the decades, so much of film action time is taken up with people on the phone. In this film, Maureen spends an inordinate amount of time with her smart phone, receiving mysterious texts, puzzling over them, communicating by text, the camera often in close-up on the messages, on the texts. This seems to be a very frustrating way of taking up film time, communicating message, and having the central character so dependent on text.

And, by the end, with the beyond-this-world suggestions, many who are sceptical audience will find these developments too much to take, not quite credible – which makes the booing at the Cannes Film Festival quite understandable.

1. The title, expectations? Themes not anticipated by the title?

2. The director, his reputation, Best Director at Cannes for this film? Kristen Stewart in his films?

3. Paris, the city, streets, shops, apartments, hotels? The countryside, the mansion? Scenes in London? The Eurostar? Morocco? The musical score?

4. The conflicting opinions about the film, awards, critical condemnation?

5. Maureen’s story, Kristin Stewart and her screen presence, cold and not drawing the audience in? The introduction, with her friends, Lara, dark house, her wandering, no lights, awaiting, the sense of a presence, sounds? Her friend, the buyers, the link with her brother, his being a medium? Their wanting the house tested?

6. The visit to the doctor, Lewis and his illness, his death, her having the same condition? Her waiting for a sign?

7. Kyra, celebrity, relying on Maureen, their talk, her expectations and demands, reputation? Going to meetings, socials? Her clothes, dresses, jewels, complete wardrobe, special occasions? A relationship? The men’s presence? Kyra’s death, murder, the arrest?

8. Maureen, shopping, the range of clothes, the shops, assistants, jewels, Maureen’s taste and decisions? Going to London? Buying the clothes? Her wanting to try them on?

9. Going back to the house, the sense of Lewis, contact? The issues of the afterlife, the discussion with Kyra’s friend, and not being sure?

10. Her boyfriend, Skype and conversations? His working in Morocco, information technology? His job, the bond between the two, his urging her to come?

11. The device of having the messages and the texting? So much of the film with the audience and camera looking at the mobile phones? The anonymous calls, playing games, sense of presence, knowing what Maureen was doing, her reaction, wanting to know who it was, the range of questions and replies, in London? On the Eurostar? Afterwards?

12. The contact daring her to overcome her fears, to try on the dresses, Maureen doing it, falling asleep?

13. Going to the apartment, discovering Kyra’s body? Her escape on the bike, return, interview with the police, his statement? Finding that she still had the jewels?

14. The decision to go to Morocco, the flight, the drive? The desert scenery? Her experience with the glass smashing, twice?

15. The sense of Lewis’s presence, her being freed? The light and her being satisfied?

16. The final image, Maureen in the light – her death or her enlightenment, her understanding?

17. The issue of the screenplay, the credibility of a ghost story like this? How much of the action was actual, real? How much in Maureen’s mind and imagination?

TRUMAN

Spain, 2015, 108 minutes, Colour.
Ricardo Darin, Javier Camara, Dolores Fonzi, Elvira Minquez, Oriol Pla.
Directed by Cesc Gay.

No, not a biography of the American President, Harry Truman. In this Spanish film, Truman is the name of a dog, the pet dog of Julian, originally from Argentina, who has been living in Madrid. He is separated from his wife and his son is away studying in Amsterdam.

Julian has a terminal illness and is spending a lot of his time putting his affairs in order, wanting to right broken relationships – and, spending a great deal of time, interviewing a range of people so that Truman will be well looked after when he goes.

A close friend from the past, Tomas, who now lives in Canada, comes to visit him.

So much of the film is taken up by conversations between Julian and Tomas, Tomas not understanding his friend’s attitude towards his illness and death, urging him to get medical help, accompanying him on visits, to restaurants and meals, remembering the past and the times that the two had together.

One of the features of the story is Julian’s decision to go to Amsterdam and to take Tomas with him. It is a sudden and impulsive journey as they track down the son at the University, meeting with his girlfriend, with Julian beating about the bush in terms of his health and the reason for his visit – although the son has been told by his mother the truth about Julian’s health. But, it is a pleasing sequence of love and reconciliation.

Julian and Tomas also encounter the ex-wife in the street, and he experiences her concern. Also in the picture, is a relation who is concerned about Julian and who has been in contact with Tomas – with a reminder of the relationship in the past and the possibility of taking it up again.

The strength of the film comes in its screenplay but is enhanced by the performances of Argentinian actor, Ricardo Darin (The Secret in their Eyes) and Spanish actor, Javier Camara (best known for his work in the films of Pedro Almodovar, Talk to Her, Bad Education).

An intelligent and emotional film for an adult audience. It won the SIGNIS award at the 2015 Hong Kong film Festival.

1. A story of friendship? Human friendship? The dog?

2. The Spanish settings, the city of Madrid, apartments, bars, the streets, theatre, airports? Contrast with Montréal in the snow, Amsterdam, the canals, the streets, the trams, the University? The musical score?

3. The focus on Tomas, his story, originally from Spain, going to Canada to study, staying, degree, work, wife and children, his farewell? The relationship with Paula? Travelling to Spain? Surprising Julian? The purpose of his visit, Julian in his illness, impending death? Staying four days?

4. The situation with Julian, his Argentinian background, coming to Madrid, staying, acting, wife, Nico, the divorce, living by himself, but with Truman? The cancer, Paula and her concern, the treatment, Tomas and Julian visiting the doctor, the frank talk, his decision not to go further on chemotherapy?

5. The portrayal of friendship, two friends talking, Tomas’s role, staying, support? Going to the theatre, the sadness of the director, giving Julian his job, hoping to have been informed about the illness? The decision to go to Amsterdam, to see Nico, to tell him of the decision? The plane flight, Tomas and his tension, Julian relaxed? Finding the boat, the student directing them, the tram, the University, the phone call?

6. Julian and his intention, Tomas to move away, but Nico, busy, meeting Sophie, the next day his birthday, the gift, the hip flask, having lunch at the cafe, the toast, the farewell – the son giving his father a more intense hug?

7. The irony, Gloria in the street, seeing Truman, talking with Julian, explaining how she had told Nico the truth? The visit to Amsterdam considered in retrospect? Julian reassuring her?

8. Truman, going for walks, old, big? Going to the family, the possible adoption? The interview with the lady and Tomas saying she was racist in her treatment of the waiter? Tomas returning, Julian bringing Truman to the airport, all the documents, travelling to Canada and to his new home?

9. The return from Amsterdam, the celebration, Paula present, happy, Tomas cooking the meal, Julian’s declaration that he would anticipate his death, the pills, Paula’s reaction, Tomas’s reaction?

10. Tomas and Paula, the meeting, spending the night, memories of the past?

11. Paula driving them to the airport, the farewells, Truman and Tomas lining up at the check-in?

12. The exploration of emotions about ageing, illness, cancers, terminal, chemotherapy and treatment, suicide, quality of life, decisions? In the context of a long friendship?

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?