MISS PEREGRINE’S HOME FOR PECULIAR CHILDREN

US, 2016, 127 minutes, Colour.
Eva Green, Asa Butterfield, Samuel L. Jackson, Judi Dench, Rupert Everett, Alison Janney, Chris O'Dowd, Terence Stamp, Ella Purnell, Finlay Mac Millan, Lauren Mc Crostie.
Directed by Tim Burton.

Peculiar is definitely the right word for the title of this film version of Ransom Riggs’ novel. He is an American writer and the action opens in Florida but moves to the United Kingdom.

When we think about the career of director, Tim Burton, ‘peculiar’ is certainly a word that comes to mind whether it be films of decades ago like Beetlejuice and his Batman films or his version of Charlie and the Chocolate Factory, Sweeney Todd or his Alice in Wonderland. No lack of peculiarity.

Strangely enough, defying the expectations of a Tim Burton film, it opens in a very sunny Florida, with our hero, Jake (Asa Butterfield with an American accent) being harassed at his job in the supermarket. But, his main concern is his elderly grandfather to whom is devoted and who has told him stories of monsters and fables all during his childhood. Grandfather, Abe, is a very BritishTerence? Stamp. Then it takes on a touch of the weird, Abe going out into the woods, a sinister monster appearing, his dying and his eyes disappearing but his final words encouraging his grandson to seek out the monsters and save the children.

What are his parents to do? They take him to a psychiatrist, played by Alison Janney, who quietly sits and listens, suggesting that he go to Britain to track down the home that his grandfather had spoken about. His father, Chris O’Dowd?, decides to go and then pays some youngsters to keep his son company on the island that they have arrived at.

So, Jake decides to try to find the home – and does, finding it situated in a time loop, stuck in September 1943, Miss Peregrine taking care of Peculiars (and, with some of them, that is rather an understatement given their appearance, their powers, touches of fire, blowing of air, little girls with tremendous strength, an invisible boy… Miss Peregrine herself (Eva Green), looks very glamorous, but is something in the vein in her British articulation of Mary Poppins and Nanny Mc Phee.

Gradually, we enter more willingly into this world with Jake, fascinated by the home, the reliving the past including German bombers flying over the house and dropping a bomb – with Miss Peregrine able to wind back her watch and save the children in the house. There is a lovely girl called Emma who is attracted to Jake and he to her – she has a huge capacity for blowing air which comes in handy when they go underwater and she examines a wreck, removing all the water, and also comes in handy at the end in a confrontation with the villain.

Jake and the audience learn the story of Abe. The dilemma is whether Jake should stay in 1943 or go back to 2016 and his father. Without giving the plot away, one might say “something of both”.

Then we start to see the monsters – although the children cannot see them. Miss Peregrine realises that Jake is a Peculiar because he actually can see the monsters – and that takes us to the rest of the film, the confrontation with the strange creatures, and the humans who have become monsters and depend on (and this is really macabre and peculiar) on gouging out eyes and eating them to regain something of their humanity!

The villains are led by Samuel L. Jackson, hamming it up exceedingly, looking like a voodoo zombie with luminescent eyes and going through all the tics of villainy that he can imagine. On the other hand, there are some cameos by Rupert Everett and a very welcome Judi Dench.

It all excites the imagination, time loops, the closing of the loops, opening up more loops, the survival of the children in other worlds, their growing day by day within the loops but the threat of their immediate ageing if they were to come into the present. What should Jake do?

Well, the only thing is to submit oneself to Tim Burton and his imaginative recreation of Ransom Riggs’ novel and wonder what one might do in Jake’s situation.

1. Popular book? Fantasy? Audience age range?

2. Tim Burton, his career, fantasy, the weird and the peculiar?

3. The fantasy sequences, imagination, design, visuals, special effects?

4. The Florida settings? Ordinary, supermarket, homes, streets, sunshine? The contrast with Wales, the island, the sea and the cliffs? A touch of the bleak? The contrast with the house, exteriors, interiors, the sea, the gardens? 1943? The musical score?

5. The action sequences, special effects, stunt work? Excitement?

6. Florida, 2016, Jake and his work, spurned by the boys and girls? Quiet? His concern about his grandfather, getting the lift? Talking with his grandfather, the disappearance into the woods, his grandfather dying, the absent eyes, the message, the mystery?

7. The grandfather and his telling the stories to the young Jake? Background in Poland, Britain, the war, the story of the monsters, fighting the monsters, protecting the children?

8. Jake and his parents, concern, taking him to the psychiatrist, her advice, the decision to go to the island – (and the later revelation that this was Barron in disguise)?

9. The island, the father and his concern, paying the boys to be with Jake? Jake and his wandering, searching for the home?

10. The home, the time loops, September 1943, the war, the German planes and bombardment? Miss Peregrine and her appearance, manner of speaking, and nanny type? The range of children, Peculiars? Visual, their powers? Emma and Olive, Enoch? The friendliness? Jake and the attraction to Emma? Enoch and his hostility, Emma and her sweetness, Oliver and the attraction to Enoch? The invisible boy?

11. The story of the day, reliving it, the German planes, the bomb, Miss Peregrine and her rewinding her watch? The monsters, her firing the arrow? The children unable to see the monsters? Jake able to see – his gift as a Peculiar?

12. The story of Abe, going to the war, living a normal life, ageing? His 2016 letter to Miss Peregrine and Jake reading it? The possibility for entering into the loop and exiting? Interacting?

13. Jake, going out of the loop, meeting his father, the mystery of the dead sheep and their eyes?

14. Miss Peregrine and others transformed into birds? Barron and his story? His sinister experiment, the creation of monsters, the absence of eyes? Changing? The need for removing eyes, feasting on eyes? His plan, new experiment? In Blackpool?

15. Jack returning, with Emma, going underwater, the boat, her blowing the air, a secret place? The preparation for the later voyage?

16. Miss Peregrine, the bird, transformation into Miss Avocet, her helping with the children?

17. Barron, the attack, Jake and the knife, Barron pressurising Miss Peregrine, transformation into a bird, into the cage? The children and the confrontation with the monsters?

18. Going back to the boat, the children on the boat, the different powers to get it going, the trip to Blackpool?

19. The ghost train, the pier, 1943, the present? The plan, the skeletons coming alive? Jake and seeing the monsters, their attack, the children throwing snow and icing to make them visible? The fights? Destruction?

20. Using the pier, the merry-go-round, the strong girl? The buildup to the confrontation with Barron, his madness, the voodoo look, his death?

21. Jake, the farewell, back to Florida, meeting his grandfather again, his urging him to go back?

22. His arriving, his long story of his journey to get back to the island, the different places, the loops – and a happy future with Miss Peregrine watching over them?

THE GIRL ON THE TRAIN

US, 2016, 112 minutes, Colour.
Emily Blunt, Haley Bennett, Rebecca Ferguson, Justin Theroux, Luke Evans, Edgar Ramirez, Alison Janney, Lisa Kudrow.
Directed by Tate Taylor.

A number one bestseller by Paula Hawkins, this was a much anticipated film version. Perhaps audiences were expecting something like Gillian Flynn’s Gone Girl. However, this is a film much smaller in scope, smaller in its plot, depending on the complications and the style of storytelling.

It is a New York story, a story of New York State, especially with the trains running from New York City upstate along the Hudson River, pleasing scenery, and the ability to have a close look at many of the houses on the way, even some close-ups of the people who lived there. This is the point of view of Rachel Watson, a regular commuter. She is the girl on the train – but, at the end, she makes a comment that through the experiences she is no longer the girl; she is the woman on the train.

As mentioned, the complications come in the storytelling. After being introduced to Rachel, with the caption of her name, we soon see another caption, Megan, with her explaining herself in a voice-over, followed by Anna and her story. The lives of the three women will intertwine, Each of the women has dealings with Tom, formerly the husband of Rachel but divorcing her after a failure in her becoming pregnant and IVF treatment and the lack of finance for further trials. He is now married to Anna and they actually do have a baby. For some time Megan has been a nanny in their household.


In fact, pregnancy is an important theme in the story, Rachel and her failure, Anna and her success, Megan and her stories of several pregnancies. To complicate matters, the actresses portraying Megan and Anna, Haley Bennett and Rebecca Ferguson, both blonde, do resemble each other.

But the focus of the film is certainly on Rachel.It is a star turn for British actress, Emily Blunt, who has had a successful career in England and the United States for a decade. Rachel is a disturbed woman, saddened by her failure to get pregnant, obsessed with her former husband, sometimes stalking his new wife and child, an alcoholic who does go to an AA meeting, but who has memory lapses and blackouts. She has also lost her job and has been travelling on the train, back and forth, for over a year. Her life seems to be going nowhere.

When Megan disappears, Rachel decides to act on what she has seen with Megan and her psychiatrist (Edgar Ramirez) on the veranda of Megan’s house. She visits Megan’s husband (Luke Evans), creating difficulties for him and decides to become a patient of Megan’s psychiatrist as well. The two men also becomes the target of suspicions by two detectives (one played by Alison Janney).

The structure of the film is also complex, or complicated, the action taking place in the present but, frequently, captions coming up on the screen indicating action of months earlier, weeks earlier, days earlier. This gives the audience an opportunity to create all kinds of scenarios with all kinds of speculations on characters and motivations – until a revelation at the end which, when one thinks of it, is rather commonplace.

Were the story to be told in direct narrative, it would be fairly slight and developments rather familiar – which means that the film relies very much on the jigsaw structure and its tantalising its audience.

1. The bestselling novel? The adaptation? A version of the story?

2. The New York story, New York State, the city, the train rides, the river, the woods, the homes and observation? The police precincts? The score?

3. The complexity of the plot: the introduction to the three women, the different times, the shift back to the past? The audience putting the pieces together?

4. The title, the reference to Rachel and her comment at the end that she had been girl on the train and had now matured? The narration, her character, on the train, observing, the house with Megan? Her own life, the Megan focus?

5. Megan, the introduction, looking after the baby, her explaining her different jobs? Her relationship with Anna, with Tom, with the baby, her work at the gallery, her marriage?

6. Anna, her relationship with Tom, having the baby, Rachel attempting to abduct the baby? As a wife, the domestic life?

7. And the portrait of Rachel, alcoholic, erratic behaviour, collapses, blackouts? Her being cared for by Cathy? Her stalking Anna and the baby? The feelings of hurt, the unhappy memories, her behaviour at the party with the eggs, Martha’s reaction, Tom saying he was being fired because of her? The attempted pregnancy, failure, not enough money, Tom leaving her? Her going to the AA meeting and explaining herself? Her drinking, going to the bars, the man on the train and her accosting him in the bar – and later seeing the explanation of his considerate behaviour at the tunnel? Her sad life?

8. The police, detectives, the style? Confronting Rachel, the interrogations, suspicions? The continued pursuit of the investigation?

9. Rachel, going to see Scott, her seeing Megan kissing the psychiatrist on the balcony? Her lying about knowing Megan? Scott, his relations with his wife, the effect of her being missing, as a character in himself, controlling his wife, his staying the night and cared for by Rachel, his arrest, the psychiatrist and his giving information, Scott as target? His confronting Rachel, her escape, the going to the police, accusing him of assaulting her? His watching at the end?

10. The psychiatrist and Megan, the sessions, probing, her talking about having the baby when young, the father walking out on her? Her compulsions, the romantic attitude towards the psychiatrist, the scene of his reassuring her and being misinterpreted by Rachel? Rachel going to see him, lies, his astute comments, the talking, his stirring things in Rachel’s psyche?

11. The revelation about Tom, the different perspective on him, the marriage to Rachel, her failure to be pregnant, at home, the party, Rachel’s behaviour, her tantrum, his reaction and saying he was being fired because of her? The revelation of his affair with Anna? Marrying her, her pregnancy and the baby? His seeming the devoted husband?

12. His being violent, Rachel and his lies? The affair with Anna and the deceiving of Rachel? Anna, concerned, searching the computer for the password? The phone? Megan the affair? Megan pregnant, the encounter at the tunnel, his treatment of Rachel and violent, going to the woods, the issue of pregnancy and abortion, Megan falling, his killing her?

13. Rachel, beginning to remember, the encounter with Martha on the train, hearing the truth about Tom, Martha’s concern, confronting Tom? Anna, the baby, Tom hitting Rachel, her recovery, his attempt to choke her, her hitting him, the pursuit outside, Rachel stabbing him, Anna turning the weapon in his throat?

14. The arrival of the police? The interrogation, Rachel, Anna confirming what Rachel had done?

15. The ending on the train, a new Rachel?

16. The plainness of the plot if told in straight narrative but the effect of being told in a convoluted way?

THE NEON DEMON

US, 2016, 180 minutes, Colour.
Elle Fanning, Jena Malone, Bella Heathcote, Abby Lee, Desmond Harrington, Alessandro Nivola, Karl Glusman, Christina Hendricks, Keanu Reeves.
Directed by Nicolas Winding Refn.

It is a good idea to take a deep breath before going to see a film by Nicolas Winding Refn. He likes to take on rather tough and demanding subjects, even in his early films when he was very young, Pusher, about drug dealers in Copenhagen in the mid-90s. in more recent years he has made the film about prison, Bronson, a somewhat lurid film about Los Angeles, Drive, and an excursion to Bangkok and violence, Only God Forgives. This time we are back in Los Angeles – and lurid again.

The film opens strikingly with a young girl posing in a glamorous gown on a divan but her throat cut and blood clotted – but then she goes off to remove her make up. The world of The Neon Demon is that of fashion and fashion photography. In fact, throughout the film, many of the sets are made to look as if the performers are in a photo-shoot and close-ups and couples talking are filmed in the style that would be striking in publications.

The young girl is Jessie, Elle Fanning, who turns out to be very under age although she is advised to tell everyone she is 19, arriving in Los Angeles like so many other hopefuls, dreaming of a career in the movies on television or modelling… She is very pretty and knows it, not afraid to say it. And she is ambitious, self-assured with a touch of the narcissistic. And, she is in luck with her looks.

The initial photograph was taken by a friend she met online, Dean (Karl Glusman) who is attracted to her but she is intent on her career. Despite the glamour, she has to live in a seedy motel with a rough manager, played by Keanu Reeves, who is upset when her room is trashed, only to find that a wildcat has been trapped there.

But, she gets an interview with an agent, Christina Hendricks, who gets her a photo shoot with a very grim and “artistic” photographer, Desmond Harrington, which leads to an interview with a fashion designer, Alessandro Nivola, and her career seems to be on the way.

In the meantime, she meets make-up artist, Ruby (Jena Malone) who befriends her but it is obvious to the audience, if not to Jessie, that this is a lesbian attraction. Also in the retinue are two very artificial models, one who has experienced a great deal of reconstruction, the other tall and failing to get employment (both played by Australian actresses Bella Heathcote and Abbey Lee).

The storytelling is both real and surreal, much of it played in the dark, at other times in bright sunlight and vistas of Los Angeles. Much of it is a dreamlike, especially from the point of view of Ruby and her fantasies about Jessie, especially a disturbing scene in the mortuary where Ruby works in make up for the corpses.

In fact, the film moves to some motifs from horror films at the end, with an offscreen explanation that the audience might interpret as metaphorical until we realise it is real, and think to ourselves, no, the Refn is not really going to show that… – and he does, leaving some of the characters bewildered and the audience somewhat stunned and bewildered as well.

With the focus on modelling and the young women models, the issue can be raised about the impact of “the male gaze” and the objectifying of women – but the film also raises the question of “the female gaze” and both gay and straight perspectives.

The films of Nicolas Winding Refn are quite unique in their way, expertly crafted, disturbing content, and certainly not for everyone’s taste.

1. The title? Bright lights? Hellish? Diabolical characters and activities?

2. A dream factory story, fashion? Destruction, and the horror touches?

3. The director, the graphic aspects of his content, the visuals, bright shadows?

4. The narrative, reality, dreams, surreal? The musical score and its dramatic variations?

5. The role of women in the film, the male gaze and accusations of objectifying women as sex objects? The female gaze on the women? The significance of the lesbian gaze and its effect?

6. Style of photography, close-ups, framing of couples, poses and postures, the effect?

7. The fashion world, sets, scenes, colour, clothes? The scenes and the photography looking like photo-shoots?

8. The macabre introduction, Jessie, seemingly dead, the dress, the blood, on the divan, the pose? Jessie alive, taking off the make up? Dean and his photography and hopes?

9. Jessie, her age, lying about it, her absent parents, her plans, self-focused, acknowledging that she was pretty, mirrors and the scene of her kissing her image, narcissistic? Her ambitions, meeting Dean online? The encounter with Ruby, the attraction, Ruby helping her? The blend of the naive and the shrewd? Her surface character – how much depth?

10. The film of surfaces, beauty, the range of female characters, how much beauty within?

11. Ruby taking Jessie to the party, dark, the tableau, drugs, erotic, the conversation in the bathroom? Sarah and Gigi? Their personalities, careers, self-importance? Looking down on Jessie? The relationship with Ruby?

12. Jessie staying at the motel, dark, down-market, the manager, harsh, the chaos in the room, the wildcat (and the later images with Ruby in the mansion), the destruction, Jessie’s fear, Dean and his paying for the damage? Dean and the outings with Jesse, romantic, her resistance?

13. Jessie, the interview, the agent, liking Jessie, the contact with Jack, going to the photo-shoot, his seriousness, intensity, getting her to pose, the closed shoot, Ruby and the glitter make up, Ruby ousted, Jack wanting Jessie to, her accent in?

14. Going to the designer, his style, the lineup, Gigi and her walk, failing, Jessie, his immediate attraction, her success?

15. The talk with Sarah and Gigi, Gigi and her cosmetic surgery, the extent? Sarah, her hopes? The two and their envy?

16. Ruby, the offer of consolation, Jessie going to her apartment, Ruby’s approach, the lesbian experience, Jessie’s resistance, explaining she was a virgin?

17. Ruby, the make up, for the corpses? Her work, the girl after the autopsy, the necrophilia scene, Ruby and the seductive images of Jessie, with the corpse? The effect?

18. The catwalk, Sarah and her chair, Jessie getting ready, the dress, the sequence of the triangles, her kissing her image?

19. The aftermath, Ruby and the girls, Ruby and the menstruation scene? Jessie and her collapse?

20. The beach resort, Jack and the photo shoot, firing the girl, employing Gigi, Sarah and her illness? Vomiting? The macabre aspect of the eye? The two girls saying literally that they had eaten their rival? Gigi, taking the eye, eating it? The effect?

21. The final credits, surreal, Jesse walking…?

NANNY McPHEE AND THE BIG BANG

UK, 2010, 109 minutes, Colour.
Maggie Gyllenhaal, Emma Thompson, Asa Butterfield, Daniel Mays, Rhys Ifans, Maggie Smith, Ralph Fiennes, Ewan Mc Gregor, Sam Kelly, Bill Bailey.
Directed by Susanna White.

Why are screen presentations of nannies and governesses so intriguing, a Mary Poppins syndrome, perhaps. Governesses seem to be nannies with an education/academic extension to their care and nurturing. Deborah Kerr was a governess at least three times, The King and I, The Innocents (based on Henry James' Turn of the Screw with the sinister side of nannies) and The Chalk Garden. Julie Andrews was also Maria Von Trapp. And there have been assorted nannies (especially in collages of interviews where the least likely and most unattractive candidates were rejected by parents or, sometimes especially, by mischievous children) from Miss Clavel and Madeline to the befuddlement of Margaret Rutherford's Miss Prism in the 1952, The Importance of Being Earnest with her wayward handbag.

And, lately, there has been Nanny Mc Phee - twice.

Nanny Mc Phee is the brainchild of Emma Thompson who wrote both screenplays, Nanny Mc Phee (2005) and Nanny Mc Phee and the Big Bang (2010). She based her screenplays on those of Christianna Brand and her Matilda stories.

Is Nanny Mc Phee the nanny type – or, at least, the British nanny type? And, of course, what is the British nanny type?

Mary Poppins is very precise in her language and articulation, no wasted words (and no wasted syllables in supercalifragilisticexpialidocious), objective at all times, clarifying her use of terms, focused on the here and now (look how she tidies a room with magical Sensing powers), and getting things done in swift spick and span manner. She manages. And, even the lyrics of her songs have this direct quality: 'A spoonful of sugar makes the medicine go down in the most delightful way; a robin feathering its nest has very little time to rest while gathering its bits of twine and twig...' No frills lyrics. (Compare Julie Andrews Austrian nanny in The Sound of Music, and the cuddly emotional melodies and lyrics of My Favourite Things.)

The other British movie governess is Anna Leonowens who goes to Siam: Irene Dunne in Anna and the King of Siam (1946), Deborah Kerr in The King and I (1956), Miranda Richardson in the animated King and I (1999) and Jodie Foster in Anna and the King (1999). These are determined women who know what they want, are not afraid to demand it of the recalcitrant king, and get their way. Though, it must be said, that the lyrics of many of the songs from The King and I show Anna veering towards her feeling function – take Getting to Know You and all the liking going on and 'doing it my way but nicely' and the Siamese children oohing and ahing in response.

Nanny Mc Phee certainly follows these precedents. She is articulate and clear, quietly spoken but none the less determined. Discipline and the learning of moral lessons are her forte – and she does have the advantage, like Mary Poppins, of being able to invoke magical help when necessary. She lists the lessons by number and wears the medals to prove her expertise. By and large, she brooks no nonsense from children or adults (or from her crow whose name is Edelweis!). She comes when children 'don't want her but need her' and departs when children 'don't need her but want her'. And, it is made clear that she is not one for any emotional show and dislikes goodbyes. However, like the children in Mary Poppins who are made to say, 'isn't she wonderful', when she has been ticking them off and urging them to work and to tidiness, so Nanny Mc Phee's former charges remain very loyal to her.

One endearing symbol with Nanny Mc Phee is her face, warts, buck tooth and all. When she appears (in both films), she looks like a dignified crone and scares the children. However, after each lesson has been learned by the children (not to fight, to share, to be brave...), a disfigurement disappears from her face and she finally emerges, black dress, black bonnet and all as the Emma Thompson we know and love.

The film is set during World War II with children in the country and city boys and girls sent to the farms for safety and avoiding the bombs and any big bang. The setting is rather picture-book quaint, idealising those war days – it is the same kind of situation as for the children who venture into the wardrobe to Narnia. But, rural England is more literally down-to-earth (and in the opening with huge emphasis even with Dame Maggie Smith sitting on a large cowpat because she thinks it a cushion and more comfortable!) and is explicitly 'poo-oriented' for child laughs from both children and adults. But, there are still good formative lessons to be learnt. For anyone wondering about the Big Bang itself, a bomb does fall in the family barley crop because a sneezing German pilot overhead jerks his face on to the bomb lever – but the bang (you had better see it for yourself) will probably make the Guinness Book of Records as the largest break-wind explosion in cinema history and as the most constructive use of such a function on screen!!

Nanny Mc Phee is in the business of coming to the help of harassed parents (here Maggie Gyllenhaal sporting a fine British accent and saying 'jolly well...' and things like that) and teaching children not only to behave but have good motivation for their behaviour (otherwise they could end up with the stiffest upper lip and concealed emotions and awful formality with their children as displayed by Ralph Fiennes as a War Office official, a repressed type).

The British nannies get on with a job well done!

1. The popularity of the books, the character of Nanny Mc Phee? The popularity of the first film?

2. Emma Thompson, writing, performance? Her sense of humour?

3. The World War II atmosphere, settings, re-creation of the period, the farm, family life, the detail? London, military offices? The village and the shop? The musical score?

4. Isabelle, her husband away at the war, trying to manage the children, the cousins coming to stay, the mayhem in the house? The different types of the children? Her needing help? The work on the farm? The pressure from her brother-in-law?

5. Hiring Nanny Mc Phee, her look, and nose, disfigurements – and their lessening as the story went on? Her clothes? The British nanny? Interaction with the children, their performances, trouble? Her influence on them?

6. Phil, his gambling, Mrs Biggles, her henchwomen, the touch of the vicious, pursuing him? His saying that his brother had died in the war? Forging the telegram? Norman not believing that his father was dead? The influence on the other children?

7. The picnic, Mr Docherty, the stories about the bombs?

8. Nanny Mc Phee, taking the children to London, the meeting with Lord Gray, the document that their father had died, not believing it?

9. Lord Gray, the issue of his divorce, the complexities, the children, living with their cousins?

10. Phil, his being pursued, the admission that he forged the telegram? His wanting to get his hands on the property?

11. The papers, the bombs, the bomb falling in the field, Mr Docherty and the dismantling of the bomb? Nanny and her raven?

12. The people in the village, the shop, Mrs Docherty – and the link with the past and the first story?

13. Harvesting, everybody happy – and the emotion when their father returned?

14. A very British family story?

INFERNO

US, 2016, 121 minutes, Colour.
Tom Hanks, Felicity Jones, Ben Foster, Omar Sy, Irrfan Khan, Sidse Babett Knudsen.
Directed by Ron Howard.

The poster for Inferno is not wrong. It features Tom Hanks with Felicity Jones behind him racing through the city of Florence. This begins the pattern of novels and film versions of Dan Brown stories, Professor Robert Langdon, an associate, and a quest.

With The Da Vinci Code and Angels and Demons, there was something of a pattern for Dan Brown’s plots: some kind of world-shattering crisis, the deciphering of an obscure code, a race against time, danger after danger, and one of the characters doing a 180° (rather unbelievable, if not preposterous) moral change. This is what happens here.

One of the ingredients that intrigued readers and film viewers but irritated many Christians, especially Catholics, was the focus on the Catholic Church, especially in Angels and Demons. This is not a Catholic story – though there is plenty of an atmosphere of Catholicism with settings in Florence, St Mark’s in Venice – and a Muslim touch with finding an Italian buried in Hagia Sophia.

This time the code belongs to Dante and the Inferno of the title is his – although, the villain of the piece who dies at the beginning of the film!,intends to create and Inferno of death by infection, the purging of half the human race, allegedly for its betterment because of overpopulation and the demand on resources.

This villain, seen in flashbacks, is Zobrist, played by Ben foster, a millionaire who is obsessed by overpopulation and is developing a virulent infection attack for his purposes.

Powers that be from the World Health Organisation come to Robert Langdon, familiar with his Da Vinci and Angels and Demons success, to decipher some illustrations on human bone which will lead to the discovery of where the potential plague is stored and how it will be let loose on the world.

This is the third time that Tom Hanks has played Robert Langdon so he is obviously at ease in the role. But, as the film opens, he is not at ease because he has been injected with drugs, injured, abducted, landing in hospital under the care of Dr Sienna Brooks, played by Felicity Jones (who must have been eager to take on the role after reading the screenplay and its complexities). For most of the film, Sienna and Robert Langdon are on the run, trying to evade pursuit by a murderous policewoman, an African (Omar Sy) who may or may not be their friend, a strange expert in faking elaborate scenarios (Irrfan Khan) and the WHO, led by Elizabeth (Sidse Babett Knudsen). In case we were ever wondering about Robert Langdon and his past and his relationships, the screenplay creates a past with Elizabeth.

And the code to decipher? We are shown Botticelli’s painting of Dante’s Inferno on which some letters have been inserted, leading the searching couple to the museum in Florence, contemplating paintings, looking for the death mask of Dante himself, more pursuit which leads the couple to the roof above the painting galleries (and someone crashing through the roof and devastating a classic painting). Escape from the museum leads to the baptistery in Florence, the finding of the mask, and some instructions (from whom and for what reason!) they find by scraping the back of the mask.

On the train through the Italian countryside, on to Venice, St Marks, some surprising revelations of what has happened and then on to Istanbul. All this very attractive for those who have been there that – and attractive for those who haven’t.

As with the other stories, all this happens very fast, packing an enormous amount of activity and travel into one day, for a grand climax and Robert Langdon saving the world yet again.

Someone remarked that the film is quite close to the book – which might satisfy the legion of Dan Brown fans and provide some pop entertainment for those who aren’t.

1. The popularity of Dan Brown novels and films? Conspiracy theories? Codes and decoding? The thriller style, characters, plot complications?

2. The title, the apocalyptic tone, diabolical? Plague, reducing world population for its own benefit?

3. Dr Robert Langdon, the pattern of his investigations, dangers, codes, decoding, pressed for time, betrayals?

4. The settings in Florence, Venice, train through the countryside, Istanbul? Scenic? Dramatic? The musical score?

5. The focus on Dante, his Inferno, the Botticelli painting? The Florence museums, paintings, the mask of Dante, the Eyes of Death, the baptistery in Florence, the horses outside St Marks in Venice, the tomb in Hagia Sophia, the underground waters, system, pillars?

6. The opening credits? The presence of Zobrist, his talk, lectures, videos, the millionaire, his ideas about population, reducing the population, reconstruction in pain? His being pursued by Bruder? Confrontation, his fall and death? His appearances in the flashbacks, developing his ideas, the fanaticism, his relationship with Sienna, the clothes in her apartment? His urging her to fulfil his destiny?

7. Robert Langdon, the injury, his amnesia, going to the hospital, the blurred flashbacks, Sienna and her work as a doctor, his wound, her personality, clever, aged 9 and meeting him? Tending him, his recovering, bewildered? The policewoman in the hospital – and the audience later discovering this was all staged? Sienna escaping with him, her apartment, ringing the Consul, on the run, the police pursuit, the taxi, his bleeding? His looking at his emails and the information from Ignazio?

8. Going to the museum, contemplating the pictures, the message: cerca and trova, the missing mask, the video of his taking it, the Eyes of Death, going to the baptistery, finding the mask, the message on the back of the mask and the leads? His memories, the approach by Bruder, by Elizabeth? Bruder and Elizabeth and their collaboration, the pursuit? The escape in the museum, Langdon and Sienna going to the roof, the policewoman pursuing, Sienna falling, their getting through the exit, the protest march? Going to the baptistery, recovering the mask?

9. Harry Sims, his character, his company, security, being able to arrange fake scenarios? His working for Zobrist? Motivations? The collaboration with Elizabeth? The pursuit?

10. The trip to Venice, the decapitation of the horses and the explanation, the train ride to Venice, Robert and his flashbacks, memories of discussions with Elizabeth? Under St Marks, the hundred euros to remove the grate? Sienna trapping Robert? The revelation of the truth? Flashbacks of Sienna’s collaboration with Zobrist?

11. Elizabeth, Sims, the explanations, Robert regaining his memory, the doorway, the injection, his abduction? His being given the bone code with its messages?

12. Going to Istanbul, the visit to Hagia Sophia, the tomb of the man who beheaded the horses? Hearing the underground water, going to the cistern, the huge pillars, the concert and the guests, the orchestra?

13. The buildup to the confrontation, the fights, the timing, the recovery of the container with the bacteria? The confrontation with Sienna? The situation being saved?

14. The light touch of the end with Robert returning the mask to the museum?

JOE CINQUE’S CONSOLATION

Australia, 2016, 102 minutes, Colour.
Maggie Naouri, Jerome Meyer, Sacho Joseph, Josh Mc Conville, Gia Carides, Tony Nikalakopoulos.
Directed by Sotiris, Dounoukos.

This is a drama, a dramatisation of a relationship that led to murder and a conviction in the courts in Canberra, a story of the 1990s. Author, Helen Garner, attended the proceedings and wrote a book based on them. This version of the events, drawing on Helen Garner’s work, is not focused on the court except to give information at the end. Rather, it shows the characters and the situations which led to death.

The film was made in Canberra with quite a number of vistas of the city, welcome for those who know it, interesting for those who do not. The main locations are the University as well as some homes and units around Canberra.

As regards the death, the film opens with a frantic phone call for an ambulance, an erratic message, attempts at clarification… And then the film goes into flashback with the phone call recurring at the end, seen in the realism of what actually happened.

Joe Cinque (Jerome Meyer) is first seen at a club, a pleasant young man with his friends, going over to talk with a young woman sitting there, Anu (Maggie Naouri) who accompanies him home. They have a sexual encounter. The film then moves on four years to 1998.

Joe and Anu are still together. He is employed, admired by co-workers, with a range of friends, especially those who were students of the University. But there is something amiss with Anu, some mental disturbance. She confides in some of her friends, especially Madhavi (Sacha Joseph). They have Pakistani and Indian backgrounds. Joe comes from an Italian family, devoted to his parents who are glimpsed during a meal, emphasising Italian bonding, and later after his death.

Anu seems to think that she is being weakened by drugs, especially by one she says Joe recommended to her so that she would become thinner. There are drugs around Canberra at this time, especially in the world of the young professionals and former students, heroin fairly easily supplied.

What gets into Anu’s mind is that she should kill herself – and, in going over and over of this, thinking that Joe should die as well.

There are sketches of some of the friends of the couple, typical enough of the young adults anywhere at this time. They are invited to what is to be a final meal, with Anu’s death and Joe put to sleep. When it doesn’t work out, there is another attempt which has disastrous effects, not for Anu to die, but in her trying to keep Joe sedated, eventually injecting him with heroin.

The film is one of those true case stories but it is also a sobering one and a cautionary tale.

Audiences not familiar with the case may be surprised with the information given at the end, the court case, charges, sentences and the consequences, especially for Anu.

Writer-director, Sotiris Dounoukos, was a student in Canberra at the time and knew some of those involved.

1. Story of murder, love, madness? The true story? The 1990s?

2. An adaptation of a book by Helen Garner, her presence of the trials?

3. The Australian Capital Territory, Canberra, the atmosphere? The University, units, homes? The musical score?

4. The framework, the call for the ambulance, the heroin injection? The frantic message, the voice-over? Seeing Anu and her phone call at the end?

5. The introduction to Joe, his age, pleasant young man, the bar, his friends? His relationship with his parents, Italian, the past accident, the later injury to his father, visits? The meal, Anu unwell? The meeting with Anu, the night, the sexual encounter, falling in love?

6. The passing of four years, his study, work, at the office, success, liked by his fellow workers? At home with Anu, the range of friends?

7. Joe and his ordinary life, love for Anu care for her, the friends, parties, dealing with Anu and her mental state? Her accusations about the earlier drug for thinning? The portrait, her
background, at the bar, talking about her relationships, staying the night, four years passing, with Joe, the deteriorating mental state, the drugs, wanting to be thin, always upset, studies, confiding in her friends, especially in Madhavi? The law and legal studies and the improvising of the court case?

8. Anu and her friendship with Madhavi, the other friends, her depression, her plan, the suicide, involving Joe?

9. The preparing the parties, contacting the friends, their being puzzled, the discussions, the dinner, Joe and the pills, the failure of the attempt?

10. The decision of the second attempt, Madhavi and her reluctance to collaborate? The issue of the drugs, the dealer and her going to him? The discussions with the girl about the heroin? The plan, Joe and his death?

11. The party, the white dress, having more friends at the meal, their talk, Joe and his collapse, the drugs, Anu injecting him with heroin? The coma, his vomiting blood? Her phone calls?

12. The range of friends, characters, listening to Anu, hanging up on her? The girl and her reluctance, threatening to ring the police?

13. The desperate phone call, the ambulance arriving? The arrest?

14. The final information, her being convicted of manslaughter, diminished responsibility? Madhavi and her being charged, acquitted? Anu studding the law in jail, and afterwards, PhD, achievement?

15. A true story, an actual case – the cautionary tale?

THE BRITTANY MURPHY STORY

US, 2014, 90 minutes, Colour.
Amanda Fuller, Sherilyn Fenn, Eric Peterson, Adam Hagenbuch.
Directed by Joe Menendez.

Actress Brittany Murphy died in 2009 under sad circumstances aged 32. She had been a popular screen presence with quite a following. The death at such a young age seemed mysterious and there were some conspiracy theories. This film, made for television, is the equivalent of a fan magazine story, giving some basic information, trying to create characters, looking at the movie situation and stardom, the effect on a person, mental and physical health.

Many critics and audiences have not liked the film, especially for its appearance so soon after the actress’s death and its speculations.

On the other hand, it is fairly straightforward, starting with the press response to Brittany Murphy’s death, her mother and her husband speaking to the press, the mother breaking down.

The film then goes into flashback, starting with Brittany as a little girl, the absence of her father, the devotion of her mother which continues throughout her life, her mother her best friend, constant companion and guardian, but able to be manipulated by her precocious daughter.

Amanda Fuller plays Brittany Murphy, not like in looks, and not quite creating the powerful screen presence that the actress really had. Sherilyn Fenn is persuasive as her mother and Eric Peterson is the ambiguous photographer whom she marries, Simon Conjack. Adam Hagenbuch plays Ashton Kutcher and bears resemblance to the actor.

She performs in a play at school with her best friend, a much more glamorous child, but is asked by an advertising agent to appear in a commercial, pressurising her mother to consent. The mother is initially reluctant and wants a one-off. The commercials continue but Brittany takes acting lessons and wants to go to Los Angeles, again persuading her reluctant mother who sells cookery material from home by phone.Brittany shows what a good actress she is by an instant phone sales.

In Los Angeles, she has an agent, stars in the television series Murphy Brown, goes for an audition for a role in Clueless, thinking she has not won the role but finding that she has. She performs but is self-conscious, alarmed at being ridiculed for being pudgy, befriended by Alicia Silverstone, the star, but all the while Brittany Murphy making for comparisons with herself, her appearance.

The film shows the life of mother and daughter in Los Angeles, the response of the press, her transforming her looks, dying her hair, trying to be more glamorous – and a continuity of roles including a thriller with Michael Douglas, and a comedy with Ashton Kutcher with whom she begins a relationship. While this continues, the two seem very different and break up.

In the meantime, a British photographer, a touch larger and ungainly, befriends Brittany, helps her in some crises, warns her about the press turning against her. He continually reappears, and she begins to depend on him. They date, have a relationship – but she is warned very strongly in a restaurant by woman who reveals to her that he is a conman and financially in debt. She does not want to believe this, continues the relationship and eventually they marry.

A lawyer warns her and her mother about the truth of the accusations and he finally admits the truth. He wants to reboot her career, giving her scripts, arranging for a film to be made in Puerto Rico where they go but she is so disturbed that she is fired.

She has a heart murmur, has some dizzy spells, is on medication, and antidepressants. She does not want to see a doctor, despite her mother, and is alarmed when her husband has a mild heart attack.

Brittany Murphy was found dead on the floor of her apartment – the media had speculated that she was a drug addict but the film points out that she took only prescription and over-the-counter drugs and there was no sign of illicit drugs in her home or in her system. Her husband died some months later – leading to speculation that they had both been poisoned.

The film offers a sketch of Britain Brittany Murphy’s personality, life and career – but at a popular television movie level.

SHANK

UK, 2010, 90 minutes, Colour.
Kedar Williams- Stirling, Adam Deacon, Ashley Thomas, Michael Socha, Kaya Scodelario, Colin Salmon, Robbie Gee.
Directed by Mo Ali.


Shank, on the London streets and with the gangs, means a knife cut. The London streets shown here are five years ahead, in 2015. And a dismal and dingy place London is. Food is scarce and gangs look for food supplies and loot them and use them for power and control.

The avowed intention of the film-makers is to show the ugliness of street violence and to take a stand against it. One of the difficulties of this kind of film is how much violence to portray to make the anti-violence stance. And there is some violence here – although it shows it as vicious and repugnant.

It is not as if this kind of story has not been told before, but each generation is entitled to offer their interpretation. So, while there is nothing new apart from the future setting and the food issue, the film is made with quite some professional craft. It looks good, is well acted. It is 2010 contribution to the arguments about weapons, gangs and violence in the UK, especially in London.

1. The title, weapon, violence?

2. London, 2015, futuristic perspective, the streets, anarchy, government? Atmosphere? The musical score?

3. Society, collapse, government, economy? Images of collapse? Pessimism?

4. Audience response, repelled by the characters and violence, language, insight into collapsed society?

5. A focus on gangs, their age, The Paper Chaserz, Soldiers, male-oriented, teenagers, the leadership, the characters, the range of names? Violence, The Paper Chaserz and nonviolence, non-killing? The clashes and fights? Macho attitudes? Sexual harassment?

6. Junior as the focus, his age, voice-over, comments, relationship with his brother, Rager, characters, belonging to the gang, the code of not killing, the decision to rob the van, the various members, the execution?

7. The contrast with Soldiers, violence, bloodthirsty, the leader and his control, the theft, the violent clashes?

8. Junior, cornered, treatment by the gang, Rager and his beating the Soldiers? Tugz, the shank, stabbing Rager?

9. Junior, the gang, continuing, vengeance, stealing the BMX?

10. Exploitation or Insight?

THE BACKUP PLAN

US, 2010, 104 minutes, Colour.
Jennifer Lopez, Alex O' Loughlin, Eric Christian Olsen, Anthony Anderson, Melissa Mc Carthy, Tom Bosley, Linda Lavin.
Directed by Alan Poul.

This may be one of the screenplays that Jennifer Aniston turned down. And she would have been more effective in it than Jennifer Lopez – though Jennifer Lopez was pregnant with and gave birth to twins in real life.

The first premiss of films like this remind us of what a topsy turvy world we live in, especially in the personal morality areas. Zoe (Lopez) desperately wants to have children, the clock is ticking, she doesn't think any of her men friends would make good fathers, so in a consumerist culture, she goes out and buys some sperm and has herself inseminated. She also joins a support group for single mothers. (The advertising makes the point about falling in love, getting married, having a baby but not in that order.)

Having made this decision and relying on support group rather than father or father-figure, she goes and falls in love with a handsome stranger (Alex O' Loughlin) who got in one side of the cab she hailed as she got in the other. Fate brings them together again and the film turns into a romantic comedy, punctuated by a lot of detail of pregnancy, physical health and bodily functions. After seeming to fall out with her group, after being wary about trusting Stan, after being urged on by her nana (an energetic senior about to be married to a 93 year old in the home – played by Linda Lavin and Tom Bosley), after getting a lot of pep talks, Zoe turns the film into a pro baby, pro love, pro marriage comedy.

1. Variation on romantic comedy? Babies, love, marriage – in that order?

2. The title, a character called Zoe, meaning life? Her life, wanting pregnancy, her plan?

3. The American city settings, apartments, the streets, hospitals, gynaecologists? The musical score?

4. Jennifer Lopez as Zoe, age, isolated, her hopes, enquiries, procedures, not relying on the father, the sperm bank?

5. The procedure, her meeting Stan, the taxi, the credibility of the instant relationship, falling in love, clashes, marriage?

6. The expense of pregnancy, the support group – and the various members?

7. The birth scene, long, illustrating pains of birth?

8. Zoe’s background, the grandmother, the nursing home, preparing to marry, the 93-year-old room, the ceremony?

9. Stan, his character, background, cheese, academic? The discussions with his friend at the playground, prospect of kids?

10. The blend of sentiment, comedy, the message – how successful for its audience?

PSYCH: 9

US, 2007, 98 minutes, Colour.
Sara Foster, Cary Elwes, Michael Biehn, Gabriel Mann, Colleen Camp.
Directed by Andrew Shortall.

Quite a creepy film for those who enjoy feeling uncomfortable and fearful at the movies.

The setting is a hospital due for demolition. The only activity is sorting out files – and, of course, the leading lady, Roslyn (Sara Foster) takes on the night shift (her husband, Cole (Gabriel Mann) drives taxis at night, so this gives them some time together). The reason for anxiety is that there is a serial killer on the loose (which is how the film starts) and, it emerges, the victims all have files at the hospital. And action takes place only at night.

This offers the opportunity for Roslyn to wander the abandoned corridors with the slowest possible steps as the music ominously suggests frightening presences, for her to ride up in the sinister lift, look into files, hear noises and, in general, keep herself and the audience on edge. She even begins to suspect that her husband is the serial killer.

There is a kindly secretary (Colleen Camp) who got Roslyn the job despite details in her back story which are gradually revealed. She also meets a genial doctor sorting documents on the fifth floor, a British therapist, who listens to her story (Cary Elwes). And the investigating detective, Michael Biehn, keeps turning up.

There are a whole lot of strange occurrences. Is Roslyn imagining some or all of them, is she dreaming, are her flashbacks, especially concerning her abusive father and his death, actual? Needless to say, there are a few more deaths, some plot developments that are baffling at times so that we are not too sure what is happening. Probably, Roslyn isn't either. But, it doesn't matter all that much since atmosphere and creepy feelings are the most important thing.

The copyright on the film is 2007. Perhaps, the writer had been reading Denis Lehane because Psych 9 has a very Shutter Island feel about it.

1. A terror thriller? Touch of the slasher? Touch of the supernatural? The title and its tone? Psychological dimensions?

2. The hospital, the settings, the interiors, due for demolition? Action taking place at night? The musical score and its moods?

3. The focus on Roslyn, getting the job, and her help, at, Dr Irvin and his interest in Roslyn, psychologically? The husband, driving the taxi, support? The doctor and the files? Her job,
going through the files? The noises in the hospital, action – and the audience on edge as well is Roslyn?

4. The background of deaths, serial killers? Identity? Mystery?

5. Roslyn, the flashbacks to the past, relationship with father? Her own mental sanity?

6. The detective, the investigations, interrogations?

7. The effect on Roslyn, the effect on the audience? The resolution?