GOOD KILL

US 2015, 102 minutes, Colour.
Ethan Hawke, Bruce Greenwood, Zoe Kravitz, Jake Abel, Dylan Kenin, January Jones.
Directed by Andrew Niccol.

Good Kill is the response by those operating drones, far away from the actual targets and countries, in caravans in Nevada outside Las Vegas. Each time they use their surveillance in a country like Afghanistan or Yemen, against Al Qaeda or the Taliban in 2010, press the trigger, and within 10 seconds there is an explosion, a Good Kill, and the need then to estimate the damage and estimate the body count.

Andrew Nichol has had an interesting career as a writer-director, including The Truman Show, Gattaca (also with Ethan Hawke), Simone and his critique of arms dealers, The Lord of War with Nicolas Cage.

While he presents the work of the team in Nevada, using surveillance techniques, positioning the drones and pulling the triggers, the surveillance also comes from Langley as do the decisions, through the impersonal nature of the speakerphone.

The film shows the team, led by Bruce Greenwood, Ethan Hawke as a veteran pilot now grounded but who is skilled at surveillance and who sets up the targets, assisted by Zoe Kravitz and two men who are very Hawke-oriented and agree wholeheartedly with the bombing of each target.

This experience takes its toll on some of the team, especially Hawke, wanting to go back into the air, living with some depression and tension, distant from his wife and children so that ultimately his wife, January Jones, takes the children to Reno.

Depending on points of view, audiences will be critiquing the use of the drones or supportive of them wholeheartedly. But, the story of collateral damage of civilians, and the personalised story of the brutal man who rapes and bashes a woman and becomes a target, gives emotional push to the critique.

This whole scenario was shown very effectively in Eye in the Sky, with British intelligence liaising with American intelligence and the drone operators in the same headquarters and caravan in Nevada.

1. The title, as used throughout the film? Success of a drone mission?

2. American drones, 2010, the use, surveillance, bombings, killings? The film’s attitude towards the use of drones? Discriminate and indiscriminate? The targets, collateral damage? The psyche of those who pull the triggers, the commanders, the intelligence decisions at Langley?

3. The interiors, the caravans for the drone strikes – and the notice about leaving the United States? Homes and interiors? The casinos? The atmosphere of Nevada, the desert, the bright lights of Las Vegas, the streets, the casinos? The contrast between the two worlds? The observations through surveillance of Afghanistan, Yemen and other countries? The musical score?

4. The focus on Tom Egan, age, experience, former pilot, grounded? His role in the drone squad? Surveillance and precision? The estimation of the targets? The body count? His age and experience, his regrets about not flying, making requests? His relationship with the commander, with the other members of the squad? Sharing the responsibility with Suarez? Her sensitivities? The hawkish attitudes of the other two men? Listening to the disembodied instructions from Langley?

5. The focusing of the targets, suspicions of terrorists, Al Qaeda, the Taliban? Trucks, items, civilians, suspicious men? The focus on the brutal man, entering the compound, the rape of the woman, the physical battering, the repetition – the focus of the end, Egan killing him, the risk of the death of the woman, and not knowing? His being reprimanded? His refusal to shoot at other times – and his fiddling with the controls, saying they were out of control?

6. Suarez, her skills, working with Egan, the clashes with the other two? Going out, casino, dress, talking with Egan? Empathy with him?

7. The commander, his hawkish attitudes, obeying orders, the wear and tear on him? His attitudes towards Egan, their discussions, having to reprimand him at the end? The other two men, cavalier attitudes, Hawks and the bombings and no second thoughts?

8. Egan, his home life, his wife, coping, the children, the outings, studies? His wife, intimacy, the feelings of tension, his sense of absence, the understanding of his wanting to go into combat? At home, their discussions, the difficulties with the sexual relationship? His suspicions of her, thinking about an affair, checking her phone? The decision to leave, to go to Reno with the children?

9. Egan, alone, his contemplation, his regrets? Finishing, his resignation? His driving to Reno? What future?

10. The film as a challenge to audience consciousness about drones, their effectiveness, the dangers, the decisions made thousands of miles from the targets, intelligence at Langley, seemingly disembodied experts, and the toll on those who have to execute the decisions and fire the bombs?

TAIS-TOI!/ RUBY AND QUENTIN

France, 2003, 85 minutes, Colour.
Gerard Depardieu, Jean Reno, Richard Berry, Andre Dussollier, Michel Aumont.
Directed by Francis Veber.

Tais Toi! sounds so polite to the non-French ear. It almost sounds affectionate it its familiar use of ‘toi’, the way of addressing close friends. Don’t be misled. It means, ‘Shut up!’.

Would you enjoy a comedy called, ‘Shut up’? The answer is yes. An even bigger ‘yes’, if you see it with an ordinary paying audience who are not embarrassed to guffaw at times. Even though there was scarcely a ripple at the film critics’ preview, I did hear the projectionist telling a mate who had just arrived that it was the funniest film he had seen in ages.

Of course, tastes differ. But Tais Toi should cover most tastes.

Apart from some funny scenes and funny lines (even in the sub-titles), what does it have to commend it?

First of all the stars are first-rate. Gerard Depardieu is a hero at home. Despite his huge and sometimes scruffy and ungainly appearance, he can take on any role and be convincing. By this stage, he has made enough international films to make him a familiar name. Here, he plays Quentin, a simple soul from the Paris suburbs, a born optimist, even though he has survived by stealing and stints in prison. And he talks, talks, talks and drives people, including his psychiatrist, crazy.

Obviously he is the one on the receiving end of ‘shut up!’.

Jean Reno might not be a household name but he is a familiar face outside France where he too is a top star.
From Mission Impossible to The Da Vinci Code, he is an international performer. Here he is Ruby, a taciturn killer and thief.

Obviously he is one on the giving end of ‘shut up!”.

For most of the film they are on the run from the police and a criminal gang. It is their oddball escapades and the contrast of characters which provide the fun – and, by the end, some feeling.

It is written by Francis Veber who has done a lot of comedies about odd couples and directed Diner des Cons and The Closet.

1. The title, the term, in relationship to Quentin, in relationship to Ruby?

2. The work of the director, his writings, his skill in farce, contrasting characters, witty dialogue and comedy?

3. The French locations, the city, the street, criminals on the run? The musical score?

4. Gerard Depardieu as Quentin? The initial robbery, ineffectual, asking directions for the bank, going to the cinema, Ice Age and his staying to enjoy it? Continually talking, extreme extrovert, in the cells with the prisoners, finding himself with Ruby? The talk, the suicide attempts, real and fake? The two in adjacent beds in the hospital?

5. Ruby, criminal, his attitude towards Vogel, the crime lord, the affair with his wife, the money, hiding it, going to jail? The hunger strike, not speaking? Interactions with the psychologist and the understanding? The fake suicide? In the cell with Quentin and his incessant talk, in hospital in the adjacent bed? Desperate?

6. The psychologist, the contact with Vogel, Ruby’s escape, Quentin and his friend helping, the crane?

7. The world of the criminals, Vogel, his bodyguards, the taking of the cars, the pursuit?

8. Ruby and Quentin, together, the odd couple? The robbery, the horse trainer? The disguise, the Chanel clothes? The young men, the stealing of the cars, Ruby wounded in the shoulder, Quentin?

9. Ruby, the woman, putting her in the hotel?

10. The car chase, Vogel, Quentin wounded, Ruby sorry, Quentin’s recovery – and persuading Ruby to help him invest in establishing the cafe?

VERS LE SUD (HEADING SOUTH)

France, 2005, 100 minutes, Colour.
Charlotte Rampling, Karen Young, Louise Portal, Menothy Cesar, Lys Ambroise, Jenkinson Pierre Olmo Diaz, Wilfred Paul.
Directed by Laurent Cantet.

For a while, Laurence Cantet’s fans might be wondering whether he has forgotten his deeply social concerns in his previous fine films, Resources Humaine and L’Emploi? du Temps (Time Out). A moving prologue where a Haitian woman offers to sell her daughter to the proprietor of a hotel for tourists should have warned us. Cantet has a lot to say.

The setting is Haiti in the late 70s.

This is the kind of film where audiences will respond quite differently, depending on their points of view, especially on social justice. The three central characters are three wealthy middle-aged women from the US and Canada who holiday in Haiti, especially for the young men who operate as gigolos at the hotel. They are women whose busy lives are basically empty and they travel for what Cantet refers to as ‘love tourism’ rather than ‘sex tourism’, though they are predatory in their needy attitudes nonetheless. Were these women or audiences who share their presuppositions to watch this film, they might so identify with the women that they would, like the women themselves, not be aware of the social undercurrents in the country or ignore them or push them aside.

On the other hand, those who are alert to the sub-plot of the young Haitian who services the women, his other life beyond the hotel, and the comments made to the audience by the hotel manager, Vers le Sud turns into a strong critique of the affluent west who have no qualms in calmly exploiting the economically, socially and morally poor. As the hotel manager tells us, the country (under Duvalier rule with secret police and terror murders) is corrupt. His family had fought the Americans in the war of 1915. He says the current weapon is far more destructive than guns. It is dollars.

This means that the film works on several levels all the way through. While the women and their emotional crises are in the forefront – and very well portrayed and acted – there is a whole lot more going on, of deeper human significance.

The women are played by Charlotte Rampling with her skill in being both cold and cynical as well as deeply passionate. Louise Portal is a genial factory boss from Montreal. Karen Young is the seeming innocent who is ultimately as heartless as Charlotte Rampling’s character.

The three women are given brief monologues (as is the style of the short stories by Dany Laferriere which Cantet has adapted) which reveal their basic attitudes and expectations.

On the surface, as sunny as the beaches where most of the action takes place. Below the surface, the ugliness and destruction, that is generally hidden from the tourists.

1. The title, the geographical South, the south of failure, sexual implications?

2. The settings in Haiti, the background of its history, dictatorships, colonialism, exploitation, the beauty of the landscapes, the beaches, hotels and resorts, restaurants, bars? The musical score?

3. The problems in Haiti, prologue, the woman and her story, the history of Haiti? Setting the tone for the film – and the social critique?

4. The focus on the three women, sexual tourism, or the title of love tourism? The exploitation implied? Self-centredness? Money?

5. The locals, the young men, black, racial issues, age issues, education issues? Their role as gigolos? Performance? Sexual encounters? The money? Effect on them as persons, the relationships? Future?

6. The three women, the British woman in America, the American woman from the South, the Canadian woman? The countries and powers that they represented?

7. Ellen, British background, teaching French in Boston, age, visiting Haiti, her intentions, sexual liaisons, the relationship with Legba? Personal concern about him, wanting to save him – yet exploiting in? The end?

8. Brenda, coming to Haiti three years earlier, the role of her husband with Legba, choose one using him for sexual liaison? The tension in her marriage, the return to Haiti? Her anger, the using him and the exploitation, explosion?

9. Sue, age, work in Canada, easy-going, sexual tourism, relationships?

10. Legba, age, experience, his past with Brenda and her husband? With Ellen? his attitude towards his work, his future? The other young men, their rivalries?

11. The role of Albert, his speech, critique of the past?

12. The importance of the three monologues from the three women, revealing themselves, their attitudes?

13. The build up to the climax – and the possibilities for the future?

PAY OR DIE

US, 1960, 111 minutes, Black and white dot
Ernest Borgnine, Zohra Lampert, Alan Austin, Robert F. Simon, Vito Scotti.
Directed by Richard Wilson.

Pay or Die is a tribute to New York policeman Joe Petrosino, who fought against the Mafia, the Black Hand, in New York City in the first decade of the 20th century. He died in the service of the police in confronting the Mafia in Sicily.

This is a small budget film written and directed by Richard Wilson who worked for many years with Orson Welles and made only a few films as director. The film re-creates the period, New York City, the crowded streets, the Italian section of Brooklyn, the shopkeepers, the religious processions, the Italian loyalties.

Ernest Borgnine has a strong role as Petrosino, a man of integrity, having difficulty with writing and spelling and so failing his captain’s exams, yet trusted by the Commissioner to establish a squad of Italian police who could go undercover to confront crime, especially the extortion demands and exercises of violence, pay or die, to those who did not conform.

Zohra Lampert is a young woman training to be a teacher, assaulted by Mafia types, in love with Petrosino and eventually marrying in.

The film recreates the period and the atmosphere of fear, the influence of Sicilian criminals getting into the United States with forged documents, keeping up their Sicilian links and exercising extortion with ruthlessness.

In 1950, MGM made The Black Hand with Gene Kelly, highlighting the New York Mafia. This film came out 12 years before The Godfather and is interesting to look at now in the light of so many bigger budget films about the period and the Mafia.

1. A 1950’s perspective on the Mafia, 1906 – 1909? A half-century after the situations? Seen in the light of subsequent Mafia classics like The Godfather?

2. Recreation of the period, New York City, Brooklyn, the streets, the shops, the religious processions, the police precincts, the New York Commissioner? Costumes and decor? The visit to Sicily, atmosphere of Palermo? The musical score?

3. The title, the Mafia and the demands? Payment by shopkeepers? Fear? The organisation, controlled from Sicily, The capo? Omerta and silence? Strict code? Killings within the organisation?

4. The film is a tribute to Joe Petrosino? His work in New York City? With the Italian community? Investigations in Sicily? His murder?

5. Ernest Borgnine as Joe? His role as a policeman, an Italian in the New York force? His wanting a special squad, the selection of the men, the briefing, their taking on ordinary jobs and being seen as part of the community? Joe and the girl falling from the rope, the rope cut? His pursuit of the criminals? The further killings? His investigations, discussions with the Commissioner? His personal life, finding it difficult to read and write? The exam and his continued failing? His friendship with Adelina, going to the shop? His thinking she was interested in Johnny? Her proposal to him? The acceptance, the wedding, the dynamite with the gifts? The continued threats to his life? The explosion outside the jewellers, the death of the children, his suspicions of the lawyer, the businessman? Infiltrating the owner of the rag depot, the confrontation with the killer, the killer hanging himself? Persuading the Commissioner that he should go to Sicily, the letters home, the documents? His returning home and the birth of the child – but his death? The funeral?

6. The collaboration of the authorities in Sicily? The arrangement of the meal, the bag with the documents? The question about the capo and his dining with him – the pursuit in the streets, the shooting?

7. Adelina, the Italian family, the bakery, the studies, the work? Tutoring Joe? The attentions of Johnny? Her proposing to Joe, the wedding, the pregnancy, hopes, fears? Her grief at his death?

8. Johnny, in the district, becoming a policeman? Joining the Italian squad? Working with Joe? Delivering the rags, tossing the baton like a policeman, the letters from Sicily, his waiting with the body lying in state, capturing the capo?

9. The various members of the squad, their enthusiasm, taking up jobs, the barber and the criminal in the chair, the arrests?

10. The criminals, ordinary Italians, then migrating from Sicily, the previous records and their crimes? The disguises, the attack on Adelina, the cripple and his rising up, the false nose…?

11. A small budget film from 1960, yet its perceptions on these aspects of Italian migration, Italian neighbourhoods in New York City, the Mafia, the influence from Sicily, the police confrontation?

CRIME SCHOOL

US, 1939, 85 minutes, Black and white.
Humphrey Bogart, Gail Page, Billy Halop, Bobby Jordan, Huntz Hall, Leo Gorcey, Gabriel Dell.
Directed by Lewis Seiler.

Crime School capitalised on the popularity of the Dead End Kids in the film of the same name as well as the interest in juvenile delinquency for cinema audiences of the period.

The Dead End Kids, or some of them, had a continued career in the late 1940s and into the 1950s with quite a number of small-budget films where they were billed as The Bowery Boys, with Leo Gorsey as their leader, Huntz Hall as the comedian and Gabriel Dell as a straight man.

Here they hang out on the streets, get involved in petty crime, one of them giving a blow to a pawn shop owner and their all being arrested, heard in court, committed to a reformatory for two years. The reformatory is run severely and with touches of sadism, including a flogging, with the doctor being an alcoholic, the warden and his assistant involved in embezzlement.

Humphrey Bogart has a role as a reformer, on the side of right and humanity, visiting the reformatory, seeing the abuses, taking over, trying to motivate the young men and, after the leader stokes the boiler room to explosion almost killing one of the boys, finding a change in taking responsibility. However, the young man who did the hit is blackmailed by the assistant to get rid of reformer – but the plan backfires, not without touches of humour. There is some romance between Humphrey Bogart and Gail Page is the sister of the leader of the boys.

1. A Warner Brothers crime film of the late 1930s? The background of the film, Dead End Kids, of Angels with Dirty Faces? Concerns about juvenile delinquency in the cities?

2. New York City, the poor areas, shops, pawn shops, the streets, the courts? The reformatory, the dormitories, dining hall, the boiler room? Offices? Authentic atmosphere? Musical score?

3. The cast, the Dead End Kids, the different personalities? A star vehicle for Humphrey Bogart – on the side of the law and right?

4. The kids, in the streets, their age, older teenagers? As a gang, Frankie and his leadership? Spike’s mother tipping the water? At the pawn shop, the range of things stolen, the clash with Junkie, Spike hitting him? Their running away, rounded up? In the court? The distinctive personalities of each of the young men? With their parents and guardians, some wanting them to go to reformatory, others making a plea to the judge? Mark Braden observing?

5. The attitude of the judge? Sending them away? Their defiance?

6. At the reformatory, surly attitudes? Morgan, his severity, Cooper and his assistance? The boys having nothing to eat? In the dormitory? The older boy, Frankie and his
defiance, the fight, Frankie taken, his attempt at escape, called on the barbed wire, flogged, to the hospital, the drunken doctor, no care taken of his wounds?

7. Mark, his promotion, his visit to the reformatory, the encounter with Morgan, Cooper and his pretence? The tour, the bad food, the drunken doctor, Frankie’s back and condition? The false records of the guards, their being sacked, the doctor fired, Morgan fired?

8. Mark and the attempts at reforms, the encounters with the boys, then trusting him? His appeal for finance from the authorities, getting the boys to paint – and their making a mess, and realising they had to live with it and doing it properly? The paint on Cooper? The work in the boiler room, putting up the heat, the explosion, Squirt and his almost dying, Mark and the rescue? Frankie and his change of attitude, taking responsibility?

9. Sue, careful Frankie, the attraction to Mark, the visit and his refusal, being upset? Change of heart, completing the course, Mark getting her the job? In the courts? The dates and going out?

10. Cooper, Mark examining the books, the set up with Spike, hearing that he had been responsible for the hit, blackmailing him, the threat of imprisonment, the keys of the car, the gun, Spike and his steering Frankie? Frankie allowing himself to be riled? The going into the city, getting into the apartment, the gun, firing, the police, Mark giving an explanation? The return – and all of them in bed, even If Goofy with his boots on?

11. Mark and the boys returning, going to the office, the Commissioner with Morgan, Cooper’s story, finding the boys in bed, the charges against Morgan for embezzlement, the fight with Cooper?

12. Warner Brothers and their social concerns during this time – and the advocacy of more humane treatment and for reform?

STAR TREK BEYOND

US, 2016, 120 minutes, Colour.
Chris Pine, Zachary Quinton, Karl Urban, Zoe Saldana, Simon Pegg, John Cho, Anton Yelchin, Idris Elba, Sophia Boutella.
Directed by Justin Lin.

This is a review from an observer of Star Trek films, rather than a Trekkie fan of the television series, during the last almost 40 years when Robert Wise’s Star Trek appeared in 1979 as the first big screen movie in what has become a series, well respected and liked, led by William Shatner as Captain Kirk and Leonard Nimoy as the Vulcan, Spock. (It is good to notice that the present Spock pays tribute to his father, with his image, with the box that he left him – and, towards the end, there is a close-up of the photo of the crew of the Enterprise).

The film opens with the young Captain Kirk offering a weapon gift to a strange looking group of aliens who take all the elements of his speech the wrong way – and then leap on him, not the huge creatures we thought, but little irritant monsters. This seemed rather silly – but, the filmmakers were probably getting the audience to have a laugh before they plunged them into an intense battle sequence, spacecraft firing on spacecraft as well as hand to hand combat, all very serious.

But then it got more interesting, with the Enterprise waylaid, sent crashing into the mountainous terrain of a foreign planet. And a villain had emerged, Kraal, a heavily made up Idris Elba (but his fans can see his unmasked real face in sequences at the end). What the crew have to do, as they each landed in separate parts of the mountains and valleys, is to get together. Most of the crew are kept as prisoners, including Uhura, Zoe Saldana.and Mr Sulu, John Cho.Captain Kirk, Chris Pine, and Mr Chekov, Anton Yelchin, survive together. Bones Karl Urban) and Spock (Zachary Quinton) land together, Spock wounded and stoically suffering, but some very entertaining dialogue and banter between the two, capitalising on Spock’s extremely strong and rational interpretation, without emotion. While Scotty, Simon Pegg, lands by himself but meets an intriguing creature, female, painted in white with stripes, who saves him. She is the sworn enemy of Kraal, is an agile warrior and skilled in the ships from the Starfleet, although one which the Enterprise crew think is more than a touch prehistoric.

So, repairs all round using the skills of Scotty (some good lines and heroics but Simon Pegg was one of the co-writers of the screenplay), a rescue with beaming up techniques, Captain Kirk providing a huge distraction riding a super-charged motorbike, Mr Chekov’s knowledge and Mr Sulu’s flying skills.

Kraal is able to obtain the mysterious piece of a weapon that was offered as a gift at the opening of the film – but it unleashes all kinds of weaponry, thousands of them, and the target is the space station to be destroyed which will lead on to further destruction throughout space.

As to be expected, there is a desperate flight, Bones and Spock continuing some sparring as they go in their separate vehicle to save the day, Kraal escaping the destruction of his fleet (achieved via loud rock beat music) and a mano a mano confrontation between Kirk and Kraal.

One of the strength of the film is that each of the central characters gets a substantial amount of screen time – and the crew of the Enterprise show excellent modelling of leadership, shared decision-making and delegation of responsibilities.

For those wondering about the next film in the series, we are reassured because the reconstruction of the Enterprise seems to take practically no time such is the wizardry of future technology.

The sad aspect of the film is the memorial to the late Leonard Nimoy and the dedication of the film to Anton, recognising the very sad accidental death of the young Anton Yelchin.

1. 50 years of Star Trek? Part of so many people’s lives? The television series? The development of Trekkies and the fan base? Science fiction, the appeal to the imagination? Its contribution to 20th-century imagination in science fiction, fantasy? Into the 21st century?

2. The movies, developing the television series? The reboot for the 21st century?

3. The title, the focus on Beyond? To return more to original plots from the series? Audiences welcoming this?

4. Audience familiarity, expectations? The Enterprise, the traditions of the series? The personalities in the crew, the new crew, the links with the past? Kirk and Spock? The range of characters, the characteristics and characterisations? The relative skills, in action, relationships? The verbal interchanges? The musical score?

5. Space, The Enterprise and its interiors? The voyage? Fort Yorke, the space cities of the future? The action in the Nebula? The battles? The new planet, the mountains and valleys, caves? The action sequences? The build up to the climax?

6. Star Trek and its sense of optimism and hope, hopes for harmony, the nature of leadership, the captain but the team, collaborative decision-making, delegation?

7. The voyage, the three years? Kirk and his leadership, memories of his father? The invitation to be in the desk job at Fort Yorke? The commander and her offer, her understanding? Spock, his familiar style, reasoning, no emotions, memories of his father, the photo and the box, his decision to go back to help the Vulcans? The rest of the crew and their jobs?

8. The opening, Kirk, the presentation of the gift, the strange characters, taking every piece of information the wrong way, the descent on Kirk – and their being mini-trolls?

9. The message from the woman in deep space, a desperate call? The attack of Kraal? The battles in space, desperate, Kraal and his wanting the weapon, the search, Kirk and his hiding it? His plan, war instead of peace? His associates? The betrayal of the woman, Kraal’s spy?

10. The Enterprise, the attack, the fires, crashing to earth, the terrain?

11. On the planet, Uhura and her helping Kirk? Taken prisoner, with the crew, Mr Sulu? The background of her relationship with Spock and his terminating it? Mr Sulu and his family? Kraal, the interrogation, the crew member giving up the weapon and her being destroyed?

12. Bones and Spock, Spock’s wound, Bones helping him? The repartee between them and the contrast between reason and emotions?

13. Scott, landing by himself, the encounter with Jaylah, her appearance, painted, the story, treatment by Kraal, leading Scott to the Franklin? The possibility for repair?

14. Kirk, Chekhov, the capsule, their landing, the collaboration?

15. The plan, communications, the possibility of beaming people – Scotty working on it, transporting the crew? Scott and his ingenuity?

16. The discovery of the bike, Kirk riding it, serving as a diversion? And Sulu and all the crew able to be beamed back? The return of Bones and Spock?

17. The plan with the Franklin, repair, the old model, the touch of the pre-historic! The music and its loudness, the beat? Preparations, Chekhov and his succeeding with the dangerous takeoff?

18. The information about Kraal? His past as a soldier, the film and interviews, the way he was treated, ousted, is anger, revenge, his plan, destructive? Getting the weapon, creating the thousands of missiles? The vastness of the attack?

19. Bones and Spock, together advancing, the banter, the dangers, helping Kirk?

20. Kirk and Kraal, on the tower, Kraal’s plan, the fight, Kraal falling?

21. Success, the commander and review, Kirk and Spock, the unspoken plans, the change – and then going out into space for further adventures? And the quick repair of the Enterprise?

LONDON TO BRIGHTON

UK, 2006, 85 minutes, Colour.
Lorraine Stanley, Georgia Groome, Sam Spruell, Alexander Morton, Johnny Harris.
Directed by Paul Andrew Williams.

London to Brighton is a very effective first film by Paul Andrew Williams, a small-budget drama with a non-starry cast.

The two locations of the title are symbolic – as is the train ride between the two cities. The narrative is not told directly. We are shown flashbacks from the points of view of different characters, each throwing light on the other, so that at the end we have experienced a de profundis (‘out of the depths’) experience for a young woman and a young girl.

This is a film about the sordid aspects of London: a man who pimps for wealthy businessmen, his prostitute friend and contact, the twelve year old runaway who is enticed into a sexual situation and the son of the businessman who wants revenge for the death of his father.

The sordid events take place in London. Brighton is a place of refuge – though not for long and definitely not permanently. It provides a respite for abused characters before they have to face reality again.

The cast is persuasive, especially Lorraine Stanley as the prostitute who has not lost heart despite the ugly world in which she has to operate (which she does with a mixture of nonchalance, fear and regret) and Georgia Groome as the immature youngster who is caught up in sex and violence without the capacity for dealing with it.

Williams offers us a glimpse into this world and its haunted and hunted characters and does so with cinematic flair.

1. Small-scale drama, introduction to a sordid world? A harsh world? Possibilities for escape?

2. The title, London and the ugly world, prostitution, wealth, business and sexual exploitation? Revenge? The contrast with Brighton, a refuge, hope? And Joanne finally arriving at her grandmother’s house? The musical score?

3. The style of storytelling, the into cutting and interpretation?

4. The introduction to Kelly and Joanne, into the toilet, the bruises? The ages? Audience puzzle?

5. The revelation about Kelly, life, age, work, relationship with Derek, pimp, procuring young girls? Kelly wanting to help Joanne? The beating? The escape on the train, getting
to Brighton, Kelly still working as a prostitute, to get the money for Joanne’s trip to her grandmother’s? Kelly and her friends in Brighton, the prostitutes and their help?

6. Joanne, her age, experience, victim, being used, by Derek, by the businessman? Reliance on Kelly?

7. Derek, Kelly, pimp, the sordid world, his work?

8. The businessman, liking young girls, the sleazy atmosphere? His death? His son, the pursuit?

9. Brighton, the build up to the showdown, the situation, the gun – and Stuart changing his mind and letting Kelly and Joanne live?

10. Kelly watching Joanne, reunited with her grandmother? Leaving?

11. A slice of British criminal life?

THE BIG WHITE

US, 2005, 100 minutes, Colour.
Robin Williams, Holly Hunter, Giovanni Ribisi, Tim Blake Nelson, Woody Harrelson, Alison Lohman.
Directed by Mark Mylod.

Not easy to categorise this film. It can be seen as a comedy – though the shade is black. It can be seen as a scam and con drama. It can be seen as a murder thriller. And combinations thereof!

The setting is Alaska in winter, so plenty of snow and white. Robin Williams, much more restrained than in the past, is a travel agent with dreams of going on a trip with Waikiki airlines, but short of money. His main preoccupation is caring for the wife he deeply loves who is afflicted with Tourette’s Syndrome (and she does let loose with it!). She is played with verve by Holly Hunter. The travel agent wants to cash in an insurance policy on his brother who disappeared five years earlier. The smart insurance honcho, Giovanni Ribisi, whose girlfriend, Alison Lohman, runs a psychic phone advisory service from home – which both the agent and his wife use – is able to deny the claim which requires seven years to have passed before a payout is possible.

Enter a dead body – into a dumpster outside the travel agency. There have been black comedies about shifting corpses around like Hitchcock’s The Trouble with Harry and the Weekend at Bernie films. This one will be added to the list. Travel agent, Tourette wife, insurance agent wanting promotion, sympathetic psychic, two emotionally involved hit men – and plot complications. Into which comes the long-lost brother who has read about his death in the papers. He is played, even over-played, by Woody Harrelson as the wild man from anywhere.

The screenplay shifts moods regularly, almost as regularly as someone is tied up or beaten up or even shot. There is both comedy and pathos. Williams and Hunter bring feeling to their roles. Ribisi does his bewildered innocent turn again. No major reason to see it but, on the other hand, it is not bad.

1. The blend of the thriller with the comic? Satire? Film noir?

2. Alaska, the Canadian film locations? Snow and ice? Homes, insurance offices, the corpses and their concealment? The musical score?

3. The title, Alaska? The contrast with hopes for Waikiki and the tropics?

4. Strong cast, the different styles, comic styles? Drama?

5. Robin Williams as Paul, his age, experience, the travel agent? The comic touches, the one-liners? His desperation? Love from Margaret and concern for the? The need for money? Coming across the corpse, his idea, his brother having disappeared for five years, claiming that he was dead, providing the corpse? Getting the animals to disfigure the face? Making the claim, the hopes?

6. Margaret, Holly Hunter, love for Paul? Tourette’s Syndrome? Swearing and the extent? Hope for a cure?

7. Ted, his work, insurance agent, his age, experience, the tensions with his girlfriend, his being preoccupied with his work? Refusing Paul, issue of the corpse, the rules of not giving insurance for seven years? His suspicions? The police not suspicious? His continuing the investigation, clash with Paul?

8. The Mafia killers, the characters? The murder, corpse, wanting to recover it, the extent to which they tried, the abduction of Margaret? Threats?

9. Raymond, Woody Harrelson, his disappearance, his relationship with Paul, his wildness, his reading about his alleged death, his return, wanting some of the money?

10. Ted, his girlfriend, her being a psychic – and consulted by Paul and Margaret?

11. The build up to the climax, some seemingly funny aspects, becoming very serious? Raymond shooting Margaret – all concerned, her not dying? The deaths of the criminals?
Ted and his relationship with his girlfriend, wanting to improve it, taking a more compassionate attitude towards Paul and letting him have the money? Paul and Margaret and the possibility of the trip in the tropics together?

JOE DIRT

US, 2001, 91 minutes, Colour.
David Spade, Brittany Daniel, Dennis Miller, Adam Beach, Christopher Walken, Jaimie Pressley, Kid Rock, Eric Per Sullivan, Caroline Aaron, Fred Ward, Joe Don Baker, Rosanna Arquette, Rance Howard, Kathleen Freeman.
Directed by Dennie Gordon.

Joe Dirt was something of a hit when first released, a kind of hillbilly Forest Gump.

David Spade, who co-wrote the screenplay with Fred Wolf, is seen as an eccentric man working in Los Angeles, cleaning the toilets in a radio station. His distinctive appearance, apart from his being rather thin, is a long hairpiece which he explains was grafted onto his head when the top of his skull was missing at birth. He comes across staff members who ridicule him and then a producer who takes him in to be interviewed by the radio personality, Dennis Miller.

Joe Dirt recounts his story over several days, getting more and more listeners as the days go on, some incredulous, some laughing, but, eventually, getting a very sympathetic following.

His past is recounted in flashbacks with Eric Per Sullivan portraying the young Joe, even with the same hairpiece. When he and his parents go to the Grand Canyon, he is lost and he begins a long search for them.

The screenplay for the film in its flashbacks is quite picaresque, a whole range of episodes, some of them funny, some of them coarse, some of them crass (especially with bodily functions). At home, he falls in love with Brandy (Brittany Daniel) and she with him, some romantic episodes but he does not feel himself worthy and he is ridiculed and she pursued by one of the locals (Kid Rock). There are a lot of tangles with Brandy’s father (Joe Don Baker).

Off he goes on his search, always with Brandy in mind. He meets a sympathetic Indian, Adam Beach, selling on the side of the road. He comes across quite a number of girls, especially meeting Rosanna Arquette at a crocodile park. He gets a number of jobs but gets into all kinds of tangles. One of his best jobs is in New Orleans and he becomes very friendly with one of the locals, Christopher Walken, who seems to be very modest but when he does some heroic saving of people and Joe Dirt gets the credit, Joe announces to the media about the heroism – only to find that Walken was playing a Mafia chief who had given information to the police and was in the witness protection program.

Eventually, he gets a note from Brandy who tells him that his parents were killed in a car accident.

When Joe Dirt becomes a radio celebrity, his parents, Fred Ward and Caroline Aaron, turn up, completely exploitative, having left their son behind. They may come some kind of excuses but are unmasked as selfish. Brandy was trying to protect Joe from the bad news.

Ultimately, Joe Dirt goes to his favourite town, marries Brandy and gets the better of Kid Rock, and finds that the Mafia capo has decided to be in the witness protection program there and the proprietor of the crocodile show is also there.

A sequel was made 10 years later, capitalising on David Spade as Joe Dirt – but, in comparison with the first film, it seems very laboured, not having some of the charm and ingenuous humour of this original.

LAS ELIGIDAS/ THE CHOSEN ONES

Go, 2015, 105 minutes, Colour.
Nancy Telemantes, Oscar Torres, Leidi Guttierez.
Directed by David Pablos.

This is a rather sombre Mexican film, winner of many awards, especially in Mexico itself.

The subject is sexual slavery, Mexican-style.

The film opens with an adolescent with his girlfriend, a sexual encounter, possibilities for love.However, this is his first attempt to recruit a young girl, this time 14 years old, for his older brother, a family man with wife and children, and his father who pimp the young girls in a brothel. The older brother has been recruiting from some years and expects his younger brother to do the same.

The film focuses on the routine, the young girl invited to the family, celebrating the father’s birthday, lulling her into false security – and she has a working mother with younger brother whom she cares for. And she finds herself trapped, completely inexperienced in the life of a brothel, living in a house with many other young girls, some of whom help her with make up, with psychological advice, with the use of condoms. The film shows a collage of older, completely unattractive men, who are her clients – and she must have at least six each day for her payments.

The young man is in love with her and offers to go away with her but they are pursued and caught. The older brother then tells him that he can actually have the young girl if he recruits another one for the brothel – and we see him scouting possibilities, encountering a young girl, buying her an ice cream, getting her phone number, a sexual encounter with her – and the same routine of the birthday party and giving her a false sense of security.

While the two do get together at the end, the young girl is completely scarred by her experience and her suspicions of the young man, and her incredulity that he could do this to get another young girl.

The film is not prurient but rather more realistic in showing the harsh and abusive realities of the pimping of teenage girls and their life in sexual slavery in Mexico.