BRIDGET JONES’S BABY

UK, 2016, 122 minutes, Colour.
René Zellweger, Colin Firth, Patrick Dempsey, Emma Thompson, Jim Broadbent, Gemma Jones, Sally Phillips, Shirley Henderson, Ed Sheeran, Julian Rhind- Tutt, Sarah Solemani, Joanna Scanlon, Neil Pearson, Patrick Malahide, Kate O' Flynn.
Directed by Sharon Maguire.

The original film with Bridget Jones, Bridget Jones’s Diary, was very, very popular, not only in the UK but around the world. Somehow or other, Bridget embodied a lot of the lifestyle in the UK, in London, at the time of the millennium. She was a modern young woman, she had a professional career, she worked in the media, and she had several suitors. She was personified by René Zellweger, effectively making a transition from an American actress to a British character. And she was supported by Hugh Grant and Colin Firth.

The original film that to a sequel, audiences enjoying a second opportunity to share her life with Bridget. and then, again, almost 12 years later. Which means that for this film, Bridget is now in her 40s, celebrating her 43rd birthday to be exact, still professional, still not married, and not particularly aware of the ticking of the biological clock – though this is something, as audiences will see from the title, that she becomes much more conscious of.

Actually, the film opens with a memorial service for Hugh Grant’s character, his photo up there at the front of the church, people giving testimonies, lots of middle-European models in the congregation, Bridget and her giving a short address but then seeing old flame, Mark Darcy (Colin Firth) in the church with his wife. Bridget finds this very awkward – and this happens again when they both turn up at the christening of the child of one of their mutual friends. (Shazza and Jude are back with husbands and children).

At work, Miranda (Sarah Solemani is concerned about Bridget and her sex life, taking her to a music festival where Bridget is rescued, after she falls flat on her face in the mud, by friendly American, Jack (Patrick Dempsey) and later, stumbling into his tent instead of hers, spends the night there. Within the week, she has spent a night with Mark Darcy. At work one day, she and Miranda pop into the toilet and do a pregnancy test – yes, but, as the film spins it out, who is the father?

There are quite a lot of scenes in the television studio, some of which are quite funny, Bridget on the phone and giving a completely wrong feed to Miranda in her interview with a government minister, an actual interview with Jack when they discover that he is a guru with books about love and an algorithm to discover it, and Bridget mistakenly identifying the chauffeur with the Chinese general who is to be interviewed, quite a muck-up, as is the presentation she has to offer, when her job is on the line with a brash young new producer, and the technology goes wrong, with some visually embarrassing consequences.

But, as the title reminds us, we are concerned about Bridget Jones’s baby. It takes a long time for her to tell each of the men that they are potential father and each is delighted. They both participate in the birth preparation – which is under the care of a very sharp-tongued doctor, played by Emma Thompson (who co-wrote the script and probably wrote her own smart lines). Various ups and downs, various tensions, the birth of the baby – the screenplay suggesting to us that we think that the father will be Jack and then that it will be Mark, leaving the results of the DNA test to the very end of the film, and a wedding (and don’t miss the final Hugh Grant joke with the final credits).

It is more or less what one might expect given the previous films except that the target audience is now 15 years older, and with something of a different age sensibility.

1. The popularity of the first two films? The novels? Bridget, the other characters, romance?

2. 16 years later, Bridget and her age, René Zellweger’s presence? Bridget’s life, relationships with Mark? With Daniel? Her professional work, television?

3. The British style of the film, tone, characters, dialogue, humour? The cast? The musical score?

4. Bridget as a character, very British, from London, the insertion of flashbacks for when she and Mark with young? At 43, one candle, getting up, the phone call from her mother, at work, everybody celebrating, the 43 candles, her accepting her age?

5. The photo at the funeral, Hugh Grant and his presence in the previous films? The speeches, the range of women present, models? Bridget’s short speech? Mark present, his wife? Bridget and her friends, Shazza, Jude, their husbands, families? Their changes over the years?

6. Bridget at work, her friendship with Miranda, sharing with her, talk about pregnancy and sex? The interview with the Foreign Secretary? Bridget on the phone and the wrong feed, the wrong questions? Richard as her boss, his friendship, puzzled?

7. Miranda persuading Bridget to go out, the music festival, packing and clothes, her suitcase, the sex advice? Her falling in the mud? Jack helping her up? Fitting the shoe? Going back stage, not recognising Ed Sheeran, the request of the selfie in the photo? Miranda in the ball with Ed Sheeran? Bridget, going to the wrong tent, talking, the light going on, the experience of Jack? The night together?

8. The result of the festival, the effect, going to the christening, arriving late, the traffic jam, being godmother, Mark at the christening? Going to the house, the night together, her leaving the note?

9. Back at work, the role of Alice, her tight manner, young, appearance, accent? The policy for Hard News? Bridget and the presentation? The discovery of who Jack was, his reputation, the video, his book, love, the algorithm? Inviting him on television? Alice happy, but not with the algorithm? Miranda, the questions, the personal questions? His seeing Bridget? The confrontation in the foyer?

10. Miranda and Bridget in the toilet, the pregnancy test? The visiting the doctor, the doctor and her edgy comments, the scan, fear of the needle? The issue of the father, the two fathers?

11. The secret, reluctant to reveal it? The visit from her father, his confidence in her? Her mother, the campaign, discovering she was pregnant, hiding her behind the notice? Her mother’s change of heart, the social, her chatty friend, all the marginalised? The meeting, her election – but hurrying away to be a grandmother?

12. Jack coming to the presentation, Mark turning up? The presentation, the aims, media, connections, the fiasco, the men and their bottoms, the photos of the men?

13. Bridget talking with the visitor with the difficult name, with Jack and Mark, asking them to come, in the restaurant, the explanation of the situation? Their reactions?

14. Jack, American, his type, happy, talking, the sessions, diving into the pool to save Bridget?

15. The contrast with Mark, the affection in the past? His career, the law, getting off the singers with their free speech like Pussy Riot? Going to the birthing classes? Jack and Mark being mistaken for a gay couple? Bridget’s gay couple friends and their adopting? His reaction to Jack’s comments about not using a condom? The breach between the two and his avoiding
Bridget?

16. Time passing, Bridget managing, the mistaken identity of the Chinese general in the foyer, the farce of Miranda’s interview with him, the discussions with Alice, her resigning? In the rain, locked out? Seeing Mark with his wife? Her sitting in the rain?

17. Mark’s arrival, in the flat, the water breaking, throwing away his phone, no taxi, the Italians and the pizza delivery van, his carrying her to the hospital, Jack arriving on his bike, the comedy of the two men carrying her into the hospital, on the desk? In labour, too late for drugs, hitting Jack in the face, biting Mark on the arm? Ousting them? The doctor and her covering about the paternity – relieved they knew the truth?

18. The baby, Bridget and fondness? The two men going for the test?

19. One year later, the wedding, everybody there including her mother and the constituents? Jack holding the baby? Mark as the groom? Everybody happy together, Bridget wandering to the marquee with the baby?

20. The final joke, the headline, Daniel still alive!

FORTUNE HUNTERS/ THE MILLION DOLLAR KID

US, 2000, 91 minutes, Colour.
Richard Thomas, Maureen Mc Cormick, C. Thomas Howell, Corey Feldman, Alison Lohman, Andrew Sandler, Ron Colson, Neil Mandt, Randy Travis, Estelle Getty, Kaye Ballard, Clint Howard, Mark Metcalf.
Directed by Neil Mandt.

Fortune Hunters is an American-style family entertainment – about a family and a lottery ticket and the need to regain it. To appeal to the family audience, it was retitled The Million Dollar Kid.

The Fortune Family where father, Richard Thomas, is an upright somewhat stern type, dedicated to his work, and a waste not want not attitude, where mother, Maureen McCormick?, loves her husband but feels a need for some kind of relaxation, where the older daughter, Alison Lohman, is a starstruck teenager, feeling she is affirmed by a bandleader and wanting to be in his band, while the younger son, Andrew Sandler, has a thing about money, about gambling and speculation, and a hard, shrewd sense of reality.

The son takes the family heirloom, the first dollar made by their industrious grandfather, and buys a ticket in the lottery with his significant age numbers. Father gives lectures about not needing lotteries…

A week later, the numbers come up, father has thrown the ticket in the rubbish, has to pursue the rubbish man to forage the tickets – and, on his way to the lottery office, he covets a car and listens to the spiel of the salesman, Corey Feldman. He leaves the ticket in the car by mistake, a new customer coming in for the ride, trying to recover the ticket, the customer taking it, it finding its way to a tray for a delivery service. Pursuit, the car running out of petrol because of father’s strictness, the visit to the delivery service and tracking down where the parcel might have gone.

Since there are four delivery places, each of the family goes to one – although it is father, in the first visit, who tracks down the ticket, is pursued by the salesman and his customer, causes mayhem in a garden business, get into all kinds of tangles, is arrested by the police as a terrorist, is bailed out by the salesman – only for further struggles.

Mother goes to a library where she meets fashion model, Valentino, C. Thomas Howell who takes a shine to her and she responds momentarily to a vision of romance. The daughter goes to a nursing home where she encounters a cranky old lady, Kaye Ballard, and makes friends with her. The son goes to Parish Hall, meets an elderly nun, Estelle Getty, goes to the bingo hall, has great success, but loses and realises the happiness of those who win.

There are further shenanigans when the pursuers all conspire to watch the family, all wearing sombreros – and the daughter then rashly gives the ticket to the musician, promising to buy him equipment. the action transfers to the lottery building, false information about which floor the office is on, the client having the ticket, the family having extra envelopes to substitute for the real thing – and the businessman taking the son and threatening him, with all the envelopes blowing over the building. Fortunately, for a happy ending, the main envelope sticks to a railing and is recovered – and the family then go on holiday to Monte Carlo, with the old lady from the nursing home who has helped them curse their pursuers, as has the nun in threatening them with hell!

Light and easy entertainment with a touch of moralising!

LA BELLE SAISON/ SUMMERTIME

France, 2015, 104 minutes, Colour.
Cecile de France, izia Higelin, Naomie Lvovsky.
Directed by Catherine Corsini.

As can be seen from the title, this is a French film – a very French film. There is something characteristic about the way that French filmmakers show us a town and countryside, loving glimpses of the countryside, herds and crops, characters in these situations – and usually a meal or two.

This particular beautiful season is summer and the audience is immersed in the warmth of summer time, especially on a farm in the Limoges area, getting in the harvest, herding the cattle, assisting in the birth of a calf, on the tractor and ploughing the ground. but, we remember that after summer comes autumn, some chill in the air, matters not so warm as had been thought.

Which means that the title serves as an image and symbol for the experience of the two central characters. It is the 1970s.

First we are introduced to Delphine, izia Higelin, who lives with her parents on the farm, loves farming and helping her family. But, she decides to leave the farm and go to Paris where she is caught up with a group of young women activists whom she encounters on the street, exuberantly ticking off passing men. Curious and attracted, she goes to their meetings, listens to their causes, their songs and exuberance, especially that of Carole, Cecile de France, a vivacious older woman who lives with her boyfriend, Marius.

This is a film about same-sex attraction. Delphine, who has lived quietly at home, disappointed when a young woman she likes goes off to be married, is drawn to Carole who first resists but who then responds quite passionately.

A great deal of the film is taken up with the developing relationship but it all takes place on the farm where Carole goes to visit, joins in all the work on the farm, charms Delphine’s mother, is supportive of the father who has had a stroke and who sits upstairs unable to communicate. All seems to be going well – except that the two women are very secretive about the relationship.

Inevitably, they are seen together, there are some gossip in the town, the mother is shocked at such a perverse relationship and demands that Carole leave. This facilitates an emotional crisis for each of the women, Carole wanting to go back to Paris, Delphine loving the farm and having to make a decision.

The film ends in 1976 with a glimpse of what has happened to each of the women.

1. The French style and atmosphere of the film, characters, countryside, the farm, the people?

2. Limoges, the farm, the town, homes, the contrast with Paris, the streets, the buildings? The musical score?

3. The title, the emphasis on summer, the activities during the summer, especially on the farm? Sunny but Autumn approaching?

4. A film about relationships, same-sex relationships? Lesbian relationships? In the 1970s, in those times, attitudes, homophobia, attitudes about perversion, relationships being hidden, fear of coming out, sense of shame, the consequences? The film offering a 21st-century critique of this behaviour and attitudes?

5. Delphine, her age, stories of her childhood, relationships with the young girl, self-aware, heartbroken with the girl getting married, sole child, relationship with boys, knowing Antoine since she was a girl, her relationship with her parents, the hard work on the farm, driving the tractor, ploughing the fields, collecting the hay, milking and the birth of the calf? Her prospects?

6. Delphine and her decision to leave the farm at home, going to Paris, in the street, the group of girls taunting the angry man, the abortion protests, criticising the male image, getting on the bus, the laughter, the spirit, the decision to go to the meeting, the shrill behaviour, the enthusiasm, the songs, exhilaration? Talking with Carol, attracted to her? The guessing game that what she did, paying the penalty, Carole resisting, the kiss, the beginning of the affair, its effect?

7. Carole herself, her life, age, commitment to causes, feminist? Her relationship with Manuel, liking him, loving him, leaving him? His attitudes towards her, the relationship, praising her independence?

8. Her going to the country, her vivacious personality, keeping the relationship secret, her room, playing the music, Delphine going to the room, their intimacy? Delphine’s father, the stroke, going to hospital? Carole going to work on the farm, the meals, the music, dancing with Delphine’s mother, the exhilaration?

9. The father, the mother, hopes for Delphine, for her to marry? The work on the farm? The stroke, hospital, the father coming home, carrying him up the stairs, his sitting silent, the mother washing him, Carole talking with him, Delphine with him? His moving his finger with her?

10. Antoine, work in the town, seeing the two girls together, at the gathering, his hostility towards Carole? The farmer seeing the two, the gathering with the machines? The whispers? Delphine kissing Antoine and his angrily leaving?

11. Talking with Carole, her sense of freedom, the work on the farm, witnessing the birth of the calf? Her finding it oppressive? Wanting the truth to come out?

12. The mother, fighting out, ousting Carole, branding her as perverted? Delphine deciding to leave with her, their going to the station, Delphine and her decision to stay? Carole on the train, looking for Delphine?

13. The transition to 1976, Carole working for the abortion clinic, dealing with the client? Receiving the letter, reading it, the effect? Delphine, moving out of home, her own farm in the south of France, her independence?

14. 70s story in the light of the 21st-century?

WEDNESDAY, MAY 9/ CHAHARSHANBEH, 19 ORDIBEHESHT

Iran, 2015, 102 minutes, Colour.
Niki Karimi, Vahid Jalilvand.

Directed by Vahid Jlilvand.



This is a fine Iranian film. It can be said that for the last four decades, or even more, if one were to search national industries to find dramas that explored human values, often profoundly, Iran would have to be at the top or very near the top of the list. While the Iranians have made many movies for television, slight melodramas and popular comedies, their output in serious dramas has been extensive. SIGNIS (The World Association for Communication) has made numerous awards to their films.

The film opens, as the title suggests, on Wednesday, May 9, where an ad has been placed in the paper inviting people in difficult financial circumstances to come to an address and lay claim to an extensive grant. A mother and daughter appear, rather overwhelmed by the crowd, seeing the man in charge being taken away by the police, puzzled over what is happening with no one seeming to know and the police moving the crowd on. She then goes to work in a factory which processes chickens, phones her husband who has been in a serious accident and tells him she will be home late and that her daughter is with her.

Suddenly, the story comes to what seems an end and a new date appears on screen, from the preceding month, a new address. The thought comes that this is a film of different stories.Later, we find that it is not.

The second story packs more of an emotional punch than the first. It takes up the dominance of men in Iranian society and focuses on family themes of honour with consequent victimisation of a woman and a justification of violence against her.This episode is about a young woman who lives with relations and who is challenged by her male cousin about riding on the back of a motorbike with a young man – the cousin condemns her, then assaults her, which leads to a violent confrontation in the street with the young man and, what may seem strange to an audience, the young man being prosecuted for blood money and being taken to jail. What is to happen to the young woman?

But then we are back to May 9, the initial story starting over again but this time from inside the building where the man who placed the ad and works from his friend’s office has to deal with the crowds outside, the role of the police, the question of his motives for offering a grant to someone in need. We have already seen this man in his dealings with the mother and daughter, so it is not a surprise. But, as the day goes on, and the motivation of the man is revealed, we appreciate the tensions in his relationship with his wife, his being overwhelmed by the applications, and the interview with the young woman from the second story.

Once again, an Iranian director (who co-wrote the film and edited it as well as appearing as the older man offering the donation), we are given human dramas, an exploration of basic values, stories of humane concern.


1. The title of the film, the focus, the information about the street and the address, the middle section with the different day and address? The resolution?

2. The settings in Tehran, the days, the streets, crowd scenes, the police, chicken factories, homes? The second story and the interiors, the problems in the street, &? The third story and the return to the day, the interiors of the building, the crowds on the street, the meeting in the office with the young woman? The musical score?

3. The structure of the film: the first story as a story in itself? Interest? Concern and compassion? The introduction of the second story, the earlier date, the drama of the honour of the family, secret marriages, religious and civil, clashes, blood money and the courts, the pregnant young woman and her surviving? The third story and its bringing the first two together, the man giving away the money, the audience learning about him from the first story, his friend, the office, the interviews, decision-making? The epilogue and the wife not coming to the office, the pregnant young woman and the gift?

4. The impact of the first story, an allegory of life in Iran for those who are poor and financially troubled? The role of government? The role of philanthropy? The criticism of not arresting embezzlers of large sums? The crowd, the advertisement, their confusion, the role of the police? The man being taken away by the police? The puzzle? People dispersing?

5. The focus on the mother, with her daughter? Bewilderment? Going back to work, the chicken factory and her friends? Phoning her husband? His accident, injuries, disabilities, moods, brain not functioning properly? His jealousy? His wife’s return, the talk about the money, his not wanting to accept it, his suspicions of Jalal, concerned about his wife, himself, his daughter?

6. The mother, going back, meeting Jalal, his recognising her, the engagement 20 years earlier, his breaking it off, her parents’ reaction, his marriage, the two sons, the death of his young son? His concern about the mother, travelling on the bus, listening to her story, the possibility of the donation? His phone number and address?

7. The impact of the second story, the sudden introduction, the previous date? The young woman, her status in the house, looked after by the uncle and aunt, the cousin and his concern? His anger, sense of honour, criticism of the woman riding on the bike, her boyfriend, issues of shame? Honour to his parents? Discovering the truth about the marriage? His violence towards the young woman? The young man arriving, his wife not riding on the bike, not wanting to disturb? The clash with the cousin, the fight, the broken nose, the uncle and the other young man trying to tear him away? The anxiety of the young woman? The aunt, her talking with the young man, expectations of family, family visit, her criticism of the man’s mother and her make up, saying that he was a good young man but not worthy to enter into their family? The police, the arrest, the young woman and going to the station, the amount of the blood money, her going to the building where her husband was caretaker, the kindly man, staying, residents, rich, complaining about their cars not being parked…? The issue of the money, pleading with her aunt? Her pregnancy, being able to stay for a short while, otherwise out on the street, losing her baby? The kind manager and his giving her the advertisement?

8. Jalal, the death of his son, 11 years, his grief, the issue of the car, the clashes with his wife, her saying he was unfair? Her own grief? His decision to give away the money? His motivation? With his friend, in the office, the crowds of people, unexpected, the decision about the interviews, making the shortlist, the example of the woman whose husband was injured? The day passing, the weariness, Jalal thinking he had made a mistake, his friend confirming this? The decision to put out the applications and take one at random? The audience seeing the young woman answering the ad? The audience knowing what happened after Jalal left the office, his meeting with his former fiance?

9. The last day, the mother at home with her husband, his surliness, her not a ringing? The pregnant young woman to the office, waiting, Jalal phoning, continuing to wait, his final decision, signing the check? Her explanation of the difficulties? Her gratitude? Leaving, looking back?

10. Jalal, his decision, following it through, what did it mean for him?

NAKOM

Ghana, 2016, 90 minutes, Colour.
Jacob Ayanabaa.
Directed by Kelly Daniela Norris, T. W. Pittman.

Nakom is the name of a village in Ghana. The central character of this film from Ghana itself is a young man who has a scholarship, comes from the country, is in the city studying at the University. He is intelligent, has embraced the life in the city, is in a relationship with a young woman. then he receives the news of the death of his father.

The main part of the film is the young man’s return to the village, his encounter with his family, mother, brother and sister, extended relations, his uncle to whom his father was indebted and needs to be repaid, the chief of the village who makes proposals that he be his successor.

The film focuses the detail of the young man’s months in his village, a close-up of life in the village, the old customs, his Islamic beliefs, his friendship with a Christian. The young man is conscientious although he is determined to retain his scholarship and return to his studies. He stays at home, works, tries to act responsibly as regards the debt – and finally returns to his studies.

1. The impact of a film from Africa, from Ghana? Cultural background? Contemporary issues? Culture clashes?

2. The locations, the city, the University, the transport centre? The contrast with the open road, the countryside? The village, houses, meeting places? The fields, the work? Musical score?

3. The focus on Iddrissu? A young man, in the city, the scholarship, at the University, studies? Relationships, with the young woman, getting the news of his father’s death?

4. His decision to go back to the village, the transport, travelling in the minibus, through the countryside? Arriving in his village?

5. His father, the death, the accident? His debts to his brother? The burden for the young man, his mother, his sister?

6. The chief of the village, welcoming him, proposals for the future?

7. The young man, his relationship with his mother? Grief? The financial burdens? His responsibility? His younger brother, not a student? His future? His sister, the possibility for her to study? Her future in the village, marriage?

8. The visit to the uncle, the debt in abeyance, the request for delay, to harvest time?

9. Interest in the various episodes with the young man at home, his encounters with people, the effect on him, his scholarship, his studies, his sense of responsibility?

10. His staying, the work? His final decision, the farewell to his sister? His future?

THE CONFIRMATION

Canada, 2015, 101 minutes, Colour.
Clive Owen, Jaeden Lieberher, Maria Bello, Patton Oswalt, Spencer Drever, Stephen Tobolowsky, Robert Forster, Tim Blake Nelson, Matthew Modine.
Directed by Bob Nelson.

The Confirmation sounds like a religious title and, in some ways, it is – but more in the background than in the foreground.

This is an audience-friendly Canadian film with mainly an American cast, filmed in British Columbia standing in for Washington State, a small town, the background of the mountains. The audience is taken into the town, living there for a weekend, getting to know so many of the characters and the rather ordinary, sometimes low-key, way of life.

It is also a father-son bonding film with Clive Owen as Walt, the father, and Jaden Lieberher as Anthony, the young son. (Audiences may remember well another fine father-sons film, Scott Hicks’ The Boys are Back with Clive Owen.)

Walt finds it hard on a Saturday morning to get his truck going but arrives at the church to meet his ex-wife, Bonnie (Maria Bello) who is waiting for Anthony (Jaeden Lieberher) to finish his confession before she entrusts him to Walt and she and her new husband, Kyle (Matthew Modine) go to a marriage encounter retreat weekend. She has become fervent in her Catholicism – even urging Anthony in church to kneel and pray properly!

Anthony is to make his first communion and be confirmed the following weekend so he is in the church to make his confession, eight weeks since the last one. Stephen Tobolowski is Father Lyons, not the most patient of men, especially in the confessional when the penitent, taking a while to think things through, comes up with the statement that he has no sins – with Father Lyons going through a list, a bit pompously, trying to get an acknowledgement of some sinfulness but Anthony asking why would he lie, why he tried to hurt anyone… and he doesn’t know what sex thoughts means. He gets a rather large penance, begins it in the church but he hurries out to meet his parents.

The bulk of the film is something of an episodic shaggy-dog story, Walt finding that his special tools have been stolen and he needs them for a new job and sets out to search for them with Anthony as company. A number of commentators have remarked on the similarity of this plot with that of the Italian classic by Vittorio de Sica, Bicycle Thieves. The have noted some plot similarities of father and son, with Will Smith and his son, Jaden, in The Pursuit of Happyness.

As the day goes on, father and son become closer, Walt acknowledging his alcoholism and his attempts to withdraw, Anthony as a very plainspoken and direct young boy. They meet with his father’s friend, the genial Otto, Robert Forster, who gives them leads around the bars of the town for people who might know thieves and their exploits, following through on some of the leads, especially with the eccentric Drake, Patton Oswalt, who has a list but is really ineffectual. and there is Vaughan, Tim Blake Nelson, and his son Allen who becomes friends with Anthony – and does provide a lead for who stole the tools, especially an unemployed man with wife and two children who is desperate. There is also a nasty pawnbroker.

In the meantime, there are some home scenes, Walt and Anthony sharing television, computer games, meals, and Anthony having to cope with some withdrawal DTs and calling on Otto for help. Then there is the problem as to whether Anthony is going to go to mass on Sunday morning…

When Bonnie and Kyle returned from the weekend, Kyle seems to be a friendly man but a bit oblivious but Bonnie notices that the house has been lived in, that they have borrowed her car and fixed the brakes, with Anthony asking for some payment to cover the retrieval of the tools.

And, there is a final confession scene, with Anthony going through all the sins and misdemeanours of the previous 24 hours much to the astonishment and bemusement of Father Lyons. and Anthony makes a decision about his Confirmation.

A modest film but with plenty to like.

1. The title? The background of the Catholic sacraments as explained? For Anthony? his attitudes, change of heart? His acceptance of the end and his motivation?

2. Canada locations for a Washington State setting? The town, the background of the mountains, the detail of life in the town, the streets, homes, bars, pawn shops, church? The score?

3. An episodic story – and the influence of Bicycle Thieves?

4. A father and son story, the situation, the background of divorce, remarriage? Custody? The father alcoholic, unemployed, drifting, issues of custody? The wife, remarriage, the stepfather? The wife, going back to the church, her fervour, the spiritual retreat and marriage encounter?

5. Walt, Clive Owen, in himself, his past, his relationship with Bonnie, relationship with Anthony? The truck and the difficult start, arriving at the church, discussion with Bonnie, the audience understanding the situation? His agreeing to take Anthony? How strong was the bond between father and son? The father not communicating so strongly? The straight up-and-down son? The lead for the job, going to the Tavern, Anthony getting out, meeting with Allen – and Vaughan hitting Allen? The tools being robbed, the effect on Walt? Going to Otto, the strong friendship for so many years, getting leads? Following the leads? The various connections? Supplying information, the old veterans and their knowing all the thieves in the town? Going to Drake, Drake and his manner, the list of leads, the first confrontation, the man coming back with his family from camping, a Boeing worker? Walt having to apologise? Going to the two brothers, their pulling the gun? Drake and his ineptitude? Taking him back home, his being agreeable, Walt giving him some money? Going to see Vaughan, the two sons, Michael and the gun, stepping on the crickets, Anthony doing it, the invitation to shoot the rabbit, his pointing the gun at Michael? Walt’s reaction? Inviting them back? Walt going home, the house locked, Anthony getting in the window, pretending there was no alcohol? Going to the home, borrowing the car, Anthony forgetting the brakes were not working? Going to the garage, Walt fixing the brakes, the help of the garage owner and his son? At home, the meal, watching television, the computer games, Walt fixing the door? Kyle removing his shelves? The night, the withdrawal symptoms, Anthony and his concern, ringing Otto, Otto coming to help and explaining? The next morning, whether Anthony would go to church or not, avoiding Fr Lyons? Spending the day together, more information about the tools, going to Vaughan, Walt attacking him, Allen telling the truth? The confrontation with Roger, his poverty, his wife, moving, the children, Walt sympathetic? The wife promising to send the money? Going to the pawn shop, the owner, his defiance, the fight, Anthony intervening? Going home?

6. Anthony, his age, the confession, his having no sins, exasperated priest and his making all kinds of suggestions, disobedience, lying, sex thoughts…? His penance – but not saying it, the beginning of telling lies? His hiding and not wanting to go to church on Sunday? The end, decision to go to confession, recapping the day and the whole range of sins, the priest and his disbelief? His decision for communion and confirmation the next weekend? For his mother’s sake? The raising of the themes of religion, faith and reason, Anthony and his book and reading, clever and straight As? This straight up-and-down character, telling of facts?

7. The range of people in the town, ordinary, jobs, unemployment? Otto a good friend and support? The various men in the bars who knew what was happening in town? Vaughan, his sons? Drake and his ineptitude, the drugs? The man who worked for Boeing? The two brothers, slow, pulling the gun? Roger and his poverty? The pawn shop owner?

8. Bonnie, the return home, Kyle being genial, the contrast with Walt? Bonnie noticing what had happened, confronting Walt, Anthony taking the money, explaining it to his mother, her agreement about the brakes and the time to fix them? Anthony and his solution, going to see Allen, Allen going to the shop, taking the tools, not paying the money, the owner and his assistant pursuing them? Going to eat together? Walt the prospect of the job, getting his tools back, getting his house back? His decision to go to church the following week with Anthony?

9. A portrait of family, ordinary situations, crises, audience response to the characters?

LARA CROFT: TOMB RAIDER

US, 2001, 100 minutes, Colour.
Angelina Jolie, John Voight, Iain Glenn, Noah Taylor, Daniel Craig, Richard Johnson, Chris Barrie, Julian Rhind- Tutt, Leslie Phillips.
Directed by Simon West.

An action show that is based on an interactive computer game. And, that's the way it starts. Our super-heroine, guns blazing, eludes, evades, smashes, bashes and crashes technological monsters programmed to test her skills. This is a game for brains, brawn and beauty. Which means that, although the only interaction on the part of the audience is to share the thrills and spills, we are forced to identify with her to win the game.

And then it all changes.

I had expected this review to be about computer game movies. There have been some very violent versions of say, Mortal Kombat or Streetfighter, which give one pause about the time, energy and ingenuity used by youngsters (and adults) in playing these deadly games. That must be one of the key media issues of our time.

But then Lara Croft turns into this month's variation on Indiana Jones or The Mummy - and is all the more welcome for that. In fact, it turns into an old-fashioned adventure with old-fashioned ideas: a kind of masonic secret society in Venice, The Illuminati (some years before the Da Vinci Code), want to get hold of a key that will give them world power when pieces of a mysterious triangle (which our ancestors wisely separated to the ends of the earth) fit together at the moment of the alignment of the planets. (And people say the Biblical tradition is too hard to believe!!). It is Lara Croft, Lady Croft, to the rescue. She lives in a stately home outside London where her butler is trying to make her act and dress like a lady and her Australian sidekick is a technology nerd devoted to thinking up wilder and harder challenges for her.

The dastardly lawyer who represents the Illuminati steals a mysterious clock left to Lara by Lord Croft, her father, whom Lara misses intensely. Promise her that time will reverse and she can see her father again and she has motivation that takes her to Cambodia in 15 hours where she solves the mystery of the triangle piece in 15 minutes. Next stop, Iceland, standing in for Russia where the pieces will fit together and...

The film is colourful, more than a touch exotic in its decor and settings. But it does not take itself too seriously. More often than not it is sending itself up, parodying itself with smart lines and derring-do. This makes it quite engaging in a way that the Mummy movies did: over the top with tongue in cheek.

Lara Croft is the talented but, in her films as well as offscreen, oddball Angelina Jolie, an Oscar-winner for Girl, Interrupted. Gossip said she clashed with her father in real life. But, here he is on screen with her as her beloved father, Jon Voight. Their facial resemblances are striking. Noah Taylor looks dishevilled as the nerd while Iain Glen makes a splendidly nasty villain.

It won't stay in the memory, but, while it's there, it's more entertaining (for action devotees only) than expected.

1. The popularity of Lara Croft? Computer games? A female Indiana Jones? The two films?

2. The English setting, the elaborate mansion, the set up for her training, memories of her father, visions in the night, Cambodia, on the site, Venice and the Illuminati?

3. The effect of the stunts, action sequences, special effects? Musical score?

4. The introduction to Lara, the giant robot, her ingenuity and the battles, conquering the robot, the disc and her music? A reliance on Bryce for inventions and control? Hillary as her butler? Their care for her? Her training sequences, bungeejumping…? And the attack of the thugs?

5. The introduction to the Illuminati, the group, in Venice, the assembly, the alignment of the planets, every 5000 years, the need for the triangle, power, moving through time zones? Powell and his assistant, the reassurances to the assembly? The distinguished leader and his questions? The irony that Powell did not have the answers?

6. Lara, her devotion to her father, his loss, seeing him in the dream, his explanation of the alignment, warning about the triangle? The clock, examining it, Lara smashing it, the emergence of the triangle?

7. Her going to see Mr Wilson, his advice, a member of the Illuminati, her going to see Powell, her suspicions? His stealing the clock?

8. The past with Alex West, tomb Raider, the mutual taunts? Going on the adventure, to Cambodia, the action adventure, seizing the triangle? The later plane ride to Siberia?

9. The origins of the triangle, The Triangle of Light, its mysterious powers?

10. The giant statue, Lara’s escape, through the waterfall, the advice from the monk and his knowing her father?

11. Bryce, going with her on the adventures? His advice?

12. The partnership, going to Venice, Powell saying her father was a member of the Illuminati?

13. The confrontation between Lara and Powell, Bryce present, in the tomb, the solar model?

14. The threat to Alex West, the fight, Lara winning?

15. Meeting her father in cross-time? The triangle and its destruction? Time going backwards? Powell and the knife in West? The destruction of the triangle, West alive, Lara fighting Powell, this confession that he had murdered her father, the knife in him? Her getting back the picture of her mother?

16. The end, back at home, Lara Croft as a Lady, attended by Bryce and Hillary?

SPIN OUT

Australia, 2016, 91 minutes, Colour.
Xavier Samuel, Morgan Griffin, Travis Jeffery, Melissa Bergland.
Directed by Mark Gracie, Tim Ferguson.

Vroom, spin, vroom vroom, more spin – if that sounds attractive, then perhaps this is your film. If it doesn’t, probably better to give it a miss.

This is an Australian film, with financing from Screen Australia as well as from Film Victoria, it is set at Emerald Bank and around Shepparton – although, surprisingly, especially with the funding from Film Victoria, characters declaring that they want to leave the country, intending to go to Sydney rather than Melbourne!

This is very much film with blokes and sheilas, showing a great deal of (alleged) Australian blokeyness amongst mates and a picture of sheilas who tend to follow the blokes around although, in this day and age, they are certainly prepared to defy the blokes.

The occasion is a car and ute rally at Emerald Bank, an annual event, with everybody from around the place turning up, yelling their support of their favourite drivers, having a dance and party in the evening, plenty of booze (actually only beer and rum), raucous (to put it mildly), lots of talk about rooting, a cracker tossed into a dunny and splashily exploding, a competition to break the record of how many cans of beer can be drunk, and a mud fight leading to an all in mud brawl.

A bloke called Sparrow does the initial voice-over as he stands on the back of the ute, driven by his friend, Bill, who is one of the stars of the Ute rally, in competition with Lucy, no mean driver herself, who had saved Bill from drowning when they were young and they have been bickering ever since, rivals in the arena, with Bill showing off, fixing the wheel to the door handle and putting a brick under the brake and even getting out of the vehicle and performing. However, it is Mary, who could (compliment) pass for a relation of Magda Szubanski, who is the key driver, wins the rally – but is oblivious, low self-image and seemingly humourless, to Sparrow who is smitten with her, awkwardly courting her.

There are a brother and sister, dressed up to look more sophisticated, from the city, who have their eye out for a sexual liaison and, of course, land on Bill and Lucy. While the beer is being guzzled and tots of rum downed at a great rate, Bill and Lucy go through their own rivalries, insinuations against each other, finally leading to that mud fight, Lucy wanting to leave and go to Sydney, Bill not wanting to. In the morning, with couples littered unconscious around the grounds, including two mates who dress up in frocks but are in denial, Bill eventually comes to his senses…

Bill keeps telling Lucy “it doesn’t get any better than this”. While he means life around Shepparton, we realise that this could describe the plot of the film and that it has set its bar pretty low.

Xavier Samuel and Morgan Griffin bring their talent to somewhat thankless roles, but do show that there could be a little soul-searching and an admission of true love if they put their minds and hearts to it.
Many Australian films don’t get guaranteed overseas release but, perhaps strangely, this one is being distributed by Sony. Not exactly the top of the list for desired exports to make an impression on international audiences.

MOTHER TERESA

Spain/UK/ Italy, 2003, 110 minutes, Colour.
Olivia Hussey, Sebastiano Somma, Michael Mendl, Laura Morante.
Directed by Fabrizio Costa.

There have been three principal feature films, with Geraldine Chaplin in Mother Teresa: In the Name of God’s Poor (1997, director Kevin Connor), with Olivia Hussey in Mother Teresa (2003, director Fabrizio Costa) and with Juliet Stevenson in The Letters (2014, director). The priests are Fr Celeste van Exem, Mother Teresa’s spiritual director, Father Sarrano who stayed to work with her, the archbishop of Kolkota and some Vatican officials. Paul VI makes an appearance in Mother Teresa. The portraits and conversations tend to be ecclesiastical, especially in the 1940s to the 1970s.

Hussey was around 50 when she made this film, seen in Mother Teresa’s habit, stern-face, gradually stooped, a re-creation of Mother Teresa’s well-known presence. The film traces her teaching with the Loreto sisters in Calcutta, her experience of violence on the streets and the call to compassion, the resistance of her superior to her leaving, relying on her spiritual director, Father van Exem, the decision found the Missionaries of Charity, the discussions with the archbishop of Calcutta, the intervention of Rome – and the scenes of Mother Teresa over the decades with her work for the poor and your and dying in Calcutta, the establishment of the congregation, her treatment in the media, for it against, are receiving the Nobel Peace Prize.

Father van Exem is certainly an interesting character, a Belgian priest who lived for almost 50 years in Kolkota, Mother Teresa’s spiritual director and confidant. This is best seen in Mother Teresa where he is played by Michael Mendl (and by Max von Sydow in The Letters). He supports Mother Teresa’s wish to leave the Loreto Convent and work in the streets with the poor, going against the wishes of the superior, advising the Archbishop to consider her requests. He is seen celebrating Mass, blessing Mother Teresa and her sisters when the Missionaries of Charity are established, a sounding board over the decades and willing to die in Mother Teresa's stead when she has surgery. He died in 1993. This is the picture of a good priest, working within the Church structures and order, wary at first of a new congregation but always reliable in listening and advice.

The Vatican bishop she visits wants to follow protocols and not rush – but is interrupted by a phone call from Paul VI who wants her to visit him.

Fr Serrano (Sebastiano Somma) appears as a fussy Roman visitor, decides against the establishing of the Missionaries of Charity. Mother Teresa has avoided him but is advised to meet him. Fr Serrano tears up his negative document and stays for the next fifty years, advising, managing and finally admitting after Mother Teresa’s disbanding of the official charity company, that her simple way of being there was best.

1. Audience interest in and response to this film? Admiration for Mother Teresa? Her work, as a saint? The role of her critics? All these elements included in this film?

2. Audience knowledge of Mother Teresa? The Albanian origins, going to India, the many years there in Loreto, teaching in the school, with the girls? The influence of Gandhi, the issue of Partition, riots in violence in streets, Calcutta and its politics, its poverty? Mother Teresa in the 1940s, leaving the convent, her work, establishing the Missionaries of Charity? The role of the media? Holiness? The Nobel Peace prize?

3. Olivia Hussey as Mother Teresa, look, age, the stoop, her work, determined, stubborn? Her will and God’s will? The spirituality of the poor and absolute commitment?

4. Her work in the school, classes, the riots, going out of the gates, rescuing the man, putting him in the infirmary? The response of the girls? The superior and her strong stance? Sending her away, at the railway station, seeing the man dying? Leaving, going to Patna, her experience in looking after the poor, the sick, the encounters with the doctor, the urgency for the children? The young man and his leg not being amputated?

5. Father van Exem, in himself, Belgian background, ecclesiastical, spiritual advisor, director, the nature of his advice, capacity for listening? Supporting Mother Teresa in leaving, wary about founding the Congregation? His liaison with the Archbishop of Calcutta and their discussions?

6. The Archbishop, his role, sympathies? Discussions with Mother Teresa? The arrival of Father Serrano, the Roman perspective, not meeting Mother Teresa, his negative approach, changing after meeting with her? His staying for many years? The scene of the Archbishop and the priests and the blessing of the new congregation?

7. Hindu hostility, going into the room, seeing the work, changing attitudes? Taking possession of the temple? Further accommodation and pleading about finance? saving the boy’s leg, the later meeting with the boy? Mother Teresa and her demanding ambulances?

8. The girls joining from school, the superior and her antagonism?

9. Father Serrano, a diplomat from Rome, anti the establishing of the Congregation, not able to meet Mother Teresa, her fear, a resolution not to meet him, Father van Exem and the change of heart? Father Serrano staying, the years of helping with the management and the associations?

10. The years passing, her reputation, getting older, stubborn but getting her way, God’s way? Her philosophy of being able to wait for God’s time?

11. The plans for the City of Peace, the difficulties, the land, obtaining it, official difficulties in Calcutta? The arrival of Logan, his family, the donation, the photo opportunity? Anna, the volunteer, her collapse, sclerosis, returning to London, the phone call from mother for prayer? The city, wanting documents, the demolition of the wall? Father Serrano having documents and stopping the destruction?

12. The need for Roman documents, not having the money for plane tickets, meeting the patient from the past, his giving the nuns the stewards’ voucher? In the Vatican, meeting the cleric, the slowness? The Pope phoning, the audience with the Pope, wanting to establish something in Rome?

13. The journalists, suspicious of Mother Teresa, the articles and the critique, the television programs? The Logan scandal? Mother taking them all to see the money at work with the children and the sick – and give that back to Mr Logan?

14. Time passing, the Nobel Peace Prize, mother and the comment about the affluent dinner? Her speech, applause?

15. Her illness, surgery, Father van Exem and his prayer, willing to die in her stead?

16. The visit to America, her strong stands at the Association, interrupting the meeting, abolishing the association – and Father Serrano saying he agreed with her?

17. Her death, her achievement, being among the poor, people with ideological difficulties? Yet her achievement, a 20th century personality and saint?

EYE IN THE SKY

UK, 2016, 102 minutes, Colour.
Helen Mirren, Aaron Paul, Alan Rickman, Jeremy Northam, Barkhad Abdi, Iain Glenn, Phoebe Fox, Aisha Takow, Richard Mc Cabe, Monica Dolan, Michael O' Keefe, Gavan Hood, Laila Robbins.
Directed by Gavan Hood.

It was once thought that God’s eye was in the sky. Nowadays, with satellites in space and with drones and surveillance machinery so readily available, governments and military do have eyes, many eyes, in the sky.

This is a story about a drone strike, the role of the military, politicians in Britain, in the United States, legal advice, the technicians who calculate collateral damage in the case of a strike, intelligence and photo recognition, and the pilot and his associate who pulls the trigger.

Most people probably, give little thought in their everyday lives to the existence of drones, the missions, the dropping of bombs. When they do, it is usually as the result of media headlines, taking out of some terrorist leaders or the sad news of collateral damage of civilians being killed and injured in explosions.

This is where Eye in the Sky takes us, 105 minutes of screen time to give thought to all the implications of drones, strikes and the consequences.

At the opening of the film in Nairobi, we see little girl and her father mending her hulahoop and her playing in the yard (later, as a reminder of the strictness of Somalia’s Al Shebaab, she is told not to play in front of a customer who disapproves of children, playing according to Sharia law). As the little girl appears throughout the film, going up the street to sell loaves of bread that her mother is baking, we appreciate that the question of collateral damage is going to be raised in her regard at least.

The film gives immediate information about the central characters and the places where decisions will be made: at a military base in England, at a conference room in Whitehall, London, in an image recognition centre in Hawaii, local offices for collaboration with Kenyan military authorities and the room in the Nevada desert base where the pilot who will pull the trigger will watch screens and wait for orders.

We are brought up to date with the situation, a British citizen who has married a terrorist and has been radicalised, an American citizen flying in to join the local terrorist cell, the Somalis who are operating in Kenya and antagonistic towards the Kenyan government and its alliance with the UK and the US. When intelligence comes in that these suspects are in the one building, the Colonel in England makes a plan for the capture of the terrorist with British and American passports.

Most audiences will be amazed at the amount of surveillance available, the clarity of the images, the ability to zoom in and out – not just from drones in the sky but from mini-drones, mechanical birds with surveillance eyes and, then, a small mechanical beetle which can fly into rooms and around rooms bringing in extra detail to all those watching in Africa, Britain and the United States.

The screenplay has all those involved in making decisions about the strike tackling all the reasons, for and against, moral decision-making and its being grounded in rational arguments as well as emotional arguments.

The Colonel in charge is played by Helen Mirren who noted that the part was originally written for a male actor but changed for her. She is in contact with a general who goes to Whitehall for decision-making about the strike with the Attorney General, the ministers of the Crown. He is Alan Rickman in one of his final roles, and Jeremy Northam and Richard Mc Cabe as the ministers. Monica Dolan appears as another minister who has strong views about the repercussions of the strike.

The main American is the pilot, Aaron Paul, sitting with his associate in a small hut, unlike a cockpit, at the Nevada base.

Most of the action seems to be playing in real time – or at least it seems that way. The situation inside the targeted house changes dramatically bringing an urgency for a decision to be made as quickly as possible, the Colonel urging immediate action, supported by the general in Whitehall, but complications arise with the opinions of the ministers, the need to contact the Foreign Minister who is in Singapore, contacting the American Secretary of State who is in Beijing, the Prime Minister who is giving a speech in Strasbourg.

In the meantime, the little girl is selling bread at a table-stall outside the wall of the targeted building, bringing that extra dimension of collateral damage into the consideration. And the question: is the death of one little girl in collateral damage to be preferred over the potential for 80 or more people to be killed by suicide bombers in public areas. All sides of the argument are presented with some drama as the local agent, a Somali, who has controlled the beetle in the house, makes an attempt to buy all the bread so that the little girl will go home.

This means that the film is a challenge to moral stances, whether one agrees with the military making the strike decision or those who hesitate, thinking compassionately about collateral damage or weighing up the odds about public opinion if the UK and the US authorise a strike with a consequent death or whether the terrorists, Al Shebaab, will be blamed for greater acts of terror and massacres.

There is a tension throughout the film, more so as the audience begins to weigh up the choices and identify with one or other approach.

In one sense, it may be thought that there is a satisfactory ending, but, on the other hand, not.

1. The impact of the film? Hard issues and decision? 21st century policy? The nature of drones, the eye in the sky? The nature of enemies? Terrorists? The moral challenge to the authorities? The audience stances?

2. The role of terrorists in the 21st century, massacres in cities, police, searching, military, international collaboration, search and destroy?

3. Experience of drones, the targets, accuracy, the issue of collateral damage?

4. The screenplay, words, dialogue, interactions, tension?

5. The strong cast, the women and their political and military roles? Equality with men? The Colonel, the co-pilot, ministers and politics?

6. The introduction to the places with names and times, in the UK, Kenya, in Hawaii, in the US,? Later locations in Singapore, Beijing? The musical score?

7. The introduction to the situation, the Colonel, getting up, checking the computer, constant vigilance? The introduction to the general, his friendship with the Colonel? The pilot in Las Vegas? The US officers, the request, sharing intelligence? The identity expert in Hawaii? The international link-up?

8. The little girl, playing with the hoop, the father with the garage and colours, his work, the mother baking the bread? The authentic location and feel, the interiors of the house, the street, the wall of the stall? The girl playing at home with the hoop – and her father wanting her not to play in front of those who uphold Sharia Law?

9. The situation, the terrorists, the British citizen, the American arriving at the airport, his being welcomed, tracked? The aim of the mission to capture the British woman? The Colonel pursuing the British woman for 6 years? In the house, the surveillance, the drone in the sky, the mechanical bird, the beetle and its ability to go into the house, sitting on the beam? Close-up and detailed knowledge of what was happening? The local terrorists, the British woman, the American, the suicide vests, wearing them, the time limit, the targets, moving from room to room?

10. The situation in Kenya, the military and the authorities, watching, the locals, the van, communication and surveillance? Going to house, the burden the beetle, the iPad? Information, the drone and the battery going, the Somali? His stance? The girl going to sell the bread, the boy and his encounter with her?

11. The Colonel, her experience, strong stances, in the UK, and staff? Attitudes towards terrorists, capturing them, pursuing them? The issue of checking identities and why? The Nevada pilots? The military hawks? The object of urgency and not concerned about more personal nuances? The general, knowledge, communication, the computers, the screens and the politician sharing the view? The issue of legal advice? Damage experts?

12. The damage experts, calculations, 50% collateral damage, the Colonel wanting a lower figure? The pressure on the expert? The documentation?

13. The Colonel watching, the time narrowing, the bombers to leave, the need for the drone strike? The little girl, the hesitations? The contact with the local, getting the boy to go to buy the bread?

14. The Colonel wanting affirmation, from the politicians in London, from the Americans? The dropping of the bomb from the drone? The further bombing? The death of the little girl? The checking of the bodies and identifying them?

15. The General, comments, experience, buying the toy the grandchild, going to Whitehall, the range of ministers, the computers, communication, watching the screen, the role of the Colonel and influence? The military urging interaction? The Foreign Secretary wanting to be patient? Responsibilities and going further up the line? The female minister and her caution?

16. The phone call from the US official, strong words, the fabrication and verification from American authorities? Issues of responsibility and culpability?

17. The pilot, the short time in the military, training? Beginning his term? Chosen for the role? His superior officers, commission, encouragement? Expectations of him, to fire the trigger? His assistant, less experience? Working cameras, the observations, with? Seeing the little girl, the emotional response, the pilot asking for further security checks? The role of the authorities, demands, the final decision, his firing, his response, the emotional effect, the girl injured, searching for the dead? The second drop, the continued search? His being commended by his superior and to take time off?

18. Hawaii, checks and identities?

19. London, the attorney general, the ministers, the nature of the discussions, the authority, the mission, different stances, emotional responses, rational responses, the legal authorisation? The Attorney General and his attention to the law? The minister, having high responsibility, personal, deciding to check with authorities? The woman present, the emotional response, wanting exact legal requirements, the final decision, expressing her discuss to the General? The effect? Her being told off severely by the General?

20. The Foreign Secretary in Singapore, interrupted, his assistants, his being sick, the phone, his listening in to the strike?

21. The Secretary of State, in Beijing, the table tennis, authorising the drop? The presidential support? The phone call from the American authority and her insistence

22. The locals in Kenya, their watching?

23. The building of suspense, the little girl seen throughout the film, selling bread, returning home, the mother baking more, her going to the stall, waiting, the Somali and his attempt to buy the bread, his being chased away, the little boy with the cash, but its being too late?

24. The damage, the little girl, her parents, taking her to the hospital, the medical help, her death?

25. The final question for the film as to where the audience stood on the decision-making, the criteria, and the collateral damage?