THE LEGEND OF TARZAN

US, 2016, 110 minutes, Colour.
Alexander Skarsgaard, Samuel L. Jackson, Margot Robbie, Christophe Walls, Djimon Hounsou, Jim Broadbent, Simon Russell Beale, Ben Chaplin.
Directed by David Yates.

The stories of Tarzan and and his nickname, King of the Jungle, by novelist Edgar Rice Burroughs, have been popular for over 100 years. Have been silent films, classics of the 1930s with Olympic swimmer turned actor Johnny Weissmuller, a variety of Tarzans in the 1950s and 60s followed by a seriously classic version in the 1980s, The Legend of Greystoke, with Christopher Lambert.There has also been an animated Disney Tarzan and a sequel.

This film is not exactly the same as the others. This is a story of an adult John Clayton, Earl of Greystoke, and his American wife, Jane.The classic story was that of the boy John, in Africa and in and in the jungle, his parents killed, his growing up with the apes, learning to live with the animals, understand their language, move swingingly through the trees of the jungle. and, he also met Jane and rescued her.

In fact, there are some flashbacks to Tarzan and his past giving a little background to how he has become the person he is.

What is of interest for those who love history is that the setting is the 1880s, the period of Belgian colonising of the Congo, and the exportation of the native tribes by King Leopold.This film offers a critique of the Belgian colonialisation, some British collaboration (with Jim Broadbent as the English Prime Minister) and an American interest in the defence of rights, in the person of George Washington Williams, Samuel L.Jackson enjoying himself – although he does find saving Tarzan then being saved by him and running through the jungle, leaping from cliffs, balancing on giant tree trunks more than demanding.

John Clayton is sent to Africa with Jane to inspect the developments there. What actually happens is that he is pursued by Leon Rom, Christophe Waltz doing his archvillain thing again. Waltz is searching for the vast amounts of diamonds to finance Belgian progress, the building of a railway, the building forts and the establishing of a force of mercenaries. Rom has done a deal with the local chieftain, Djimon Hounsou, who is hostile to Tarzan because of the death of his son and the death of Tarzan’s parents.

A lot of the action comes from the taking of Jane by Rom, transporting her on a riverboat – but she is more than feisty and engineers her escape. In the meantime, Tarzan and Williams escape, rush through the jungle, descend on a train and liberate carriages of slaves, and then move to rescue Jane and to confront the Chief. Tarzan also has to demonstrate to Williams his knowledge of the apes and his deference to them in fighting and bowing to them.

One of the spectacles to resolve the crises is Tarzan rounding up the animals, a huge range of animals, to go stampeding through the port town.

All did not end well in the Congo but John Clayton returns to England, George Washington Williams delivers his denunciation of exploitation – and there are intimations of the new generation of Claytons.

The film was directed by David Yates who made several of the Harry Potter films.

1. The popularity of the stories by Edgar Rice Burroughs? For over 100 years? The variety of film versions, silent, Johnny Weissmuller, the films of the 1950s? Christopher Lambert, Greystoke and the more serious presentation? The Disney animated version? Audience knowledge and expectations?

2. The 21st-century telling of the story, going back to the late 19th century, in retrospect in the themes: colonialism, Belgium and King Leopold, the critique?

3. The production values, the locations in Gabon, in the UK, the mountain sequences, the animals, the gorilla fights, the stampede of the animals and the destruction of the Port? A sense of Africa in the 19 century?

4. The setting, the information about Belgium, colonialism, Leopold, the Congo? The development of the railway? The tribes enslaved? The forts, the importation of the mercenaries? The exploitation of the diamonds?

5. The UK, the British prime minister at the meeting? Discussions, money, King Leopold, the Congo? The audience with George Washington Williams, his later meeting with the group, his evidence about the slavery, data? The confrontation?

6. Rom, an archvillain, his plans for King Leopold, his travelling through the jungle, the confrontation with the tribes, mowing them down, his surviving? His tribal allies, the local chief with his vendetta against Tarzan? Rome promising to bring him? In exchange for the diamonds? Leopold and his debt, Rom arranging matters – in the plan to become governor?

7. Introduction of John Clayton, at Greystoke, the mansion, his marriage to Jane, her American background? The invitation to go to Africa? To supervise developments in the Congo?

8. The insertion of flashbacks, the audience filling in Tarzan’s background, his parents killed, a boy amongst the animals, being raised with the animals? Adapting to the jungle? His language, mimicry of animal sounds, swinging through the trees, fighting with the gorillas, kneeling in respect? The meeting with Jane, the rescue, the marriage? Return to
England?

9. George Washington Williams, the background of the Civil War, massacres, rights, his motivations, going to England, his commission, accompanying John, going to Africa, his experience of the jungle, having to keep up, John saving him, he saving John? His involvement with the action, observing the gorilla fights? With the tribesman? The animals and the stampede through the town?

10. Rom and the capture of Tarzan and Jane? On the boat, his lifestyle, the meal, treatment of Jane, his plan? Jane and the knife? The man in the cage, lowering him into the water, Jane’s escape, freeing him? The danger of the hippopotamus?

11. Tarzan and Williams, the fight with the apes, the customs, the obeisance towards the apes?

12. Tarzan swinging through the trees? Jumping from cliffs? The big boughs of the trees? And Williams following?

13. Tarzan, the capture, the chieftain, the story of the deaths, the explanation, his becoming an ally?

14. The episode with the train, the jump from the trees, landing on the carriages, the confrontation with the soldiers, the freeing of the slaves?

15. Going to the Port, Frum, his greed and deals and the deal with Rom, the exchange of the diamonds? The animals stampeding through the town? The destruction, the range of animals?

16. Rom, the crocodiles, his death?

17. The return to England, Williams report to the government? Tarzan and Jane – and the new generation of Claytons?

EMMETT'S MARK

US, 2003, 104 minutes, Colour.
Scott Wolf, Gabriel Byrne, Tim Roth, Candi Alexander, Talia balsam, Adam the favourite.
Directed by Kevin Snyder.

A small-budget police thriller with some unexpected turns, a star vehicle for television's Scott Wolf (Party of Five). He plays Emmett, a depressed detective, who gets news that he has a terminal disease. While he continues his investigations into a serial killer with some vigour, he has met a former police officer in a bar, talked about his impending death and has agreed that a contract killer can take him out suddenly so that he does not have to suffer.

Gabriel Byrne plays the go-between and hires criminal, Tim Roth.

All is not as it seems and the film builds on tension, especially with the relentlessly ruthless Roth. The film is more interested in characters and their response to these limit situations than to the actual police work, so that it gets grimmer and grimmer as it goes on. Much of the action is filmed at night, in dark apartments and on the streets and in parks which makes it an even grimmer matter of life and death.

1. A detective thriller? Psychological thriller? Suspense thriller?

2. Philadelphia, the city, police precincts, homes, bars, crime atmosphere? The musical score?

3. The title, the different meanings of mark, target, making one’s mark? The twists?

4. Emmett, his name, age, personality, his work as a detective, his abilities? The doctor, the interview, the news of his illness? The limited time? His acceptance of this? In the bar, the former policeman? Discussion, the offer for a killer, the decision about his death? The contract? His pursuing his investigations, the interviews with the women, the serial killer, the profile?

5. The importance of the time element, for him to complete his work before dying? To get to the killer when his death was no longer imminent?

6. The fixer, former policeman, his contact with the killer, taunting him?

7. The killer, fixated, alone, the pornography? His girlfriend? Mad intensity? Ruthlessness?

8. The move to melodrama, the wrong diagnosis, the search for the killer, the final confrontation? Shooting? The revelations?

9. Emmett in the light of the ending, the interviews with the women, his relationships with women, his home?

10. A psychological journey?

LES TRIPLETTES DE BELLEVILLE / THE TRIPLETS OF BELLEVILLE

France, 2002, 78 minutes, Colour.
Direected by Sylvain Chomet.

What a pity Finding Nemo was so good! If not, The Triplettes from Belleville would have won the 2003 Oscar for Best Animated Feature. (It was also nominated in the Best Song category.) It is a hoot of a film - and intriguing as well.

The animation is broad and vivid, recreating France and somewhere in North America in bold drawings and colours. Champion is a little boy who lives with his mother - and loves bicycles. When he grows up, she encourages him to enter the Tour de France. But danger lurks and Champion is abducted and shipped to Belleville where the Mafiosi have set up a theatre to run their own cycling races so that they can bet on them. His mother and pet dog follow in a pedal-boat.

It's the triplets themselves who are intriguing. Old women, drawn with great panache and detail, who used to be vaudeville singers, they befriend Champion's mother and set about a rescue mission. We realise just how much we care about poor Champion.

That's the plot. But it is the design, the drawing, the colour that are fascinating. And it is the music, a vigorous and rhythmic beating score, that keeps pumping with energy.

1. Interesting and enjoyable? Different?

2. The awards, the Oscar nominations?

3. The style of animation, layouts, atmosphere according to the decades, the delineation of characters, caricatures? The grotesque and the funny? Arrival of the fat women and the men for the cabaret? The action sequences, especially the bike riding? The musical score?

4. The opening, the 1930s, the tinted colour, the performances, the triplets and their singing, Rendezvous Belleville, their appearances, movement, voices? The supporting acts? The Josephine Baker style, the bananas, the reaction of the men, hurrying from the stage? The Fred Astaire dancer – and being consumed by his shoes? The band?

5. The transition to the mother with her son, the dog? Watching television? The 1940s? Trying to get the boy interested? Music, sitting in his room? His mother looking at the photos, the bike, his becoming interested and active?

6. Television, the speech by De Gaulle, the atmosphere France, the 1940s?

7. The adult son, his appearance, riding, his mother and the whistle, the dog? His strenuous exercise, returning home, his mother and the massage, his muscles, weariness? Eating, the food for the dog?

8. The race, the tour de France, his mother and support? The progress of the race?

9. The criminal gang, the square shouldered man, his appearance, interventions, on the mountain, the abduction of the son? His being imprisoned with the other riders, scrawny and alone?

10. The mother, the truck, the different trucks, her being deceived? Her attempts to search for her son?

11. The appearance of the triplets? Older? Singing? The music?

12. The activities, the confrontations, the excitement, success?

13. The film as a French animation classic?

THE SECOND MOTHER/ QUE HORAS ELA VOLTA/ WHAT TIME WILL SHE BE BACK

Brazil, 2015, 112 minutes, Colour.
Regina Case, Camilla Mardila, Karine Teles, Michel Joelsas.
Directed by Anna Muylaert.

The Second Mother is Val, Regina Case, a middle-aged woman who acts as servant in the house of a very wealthy family in San Paolo.

The English title focuses on the mother while the original Brazilian title talks about the time when she will return. This means that the film serves as an introduction to contemporary Brazilian society, audiences observing how similar the way of life is in San Paolo to so many other cities around the world.

But, the difference the film wants to emphasise is that of servants, masters and mistresses, the issue of class.

Val has had a hard life, separating from her husband, having to leave her daughter, Jessica, with her father and his partner, sending money to support her, sometimes bringing gifts, experiencing long years with no contact from her daughter. Val has absorbed the ethos of being a servant. She takes it for granted, obeying her rather haughty mistress, looking after the rather quiet and ineffectual master, lavishing all her capacity for love on their son, from his time as a little boy over 10 years to his adolescence, his finishing his secondary education and his sitting for university entrance exams.

Val is quite likeable but even we wish she would not be so subservient, where nothing is too much trouble, a collage of detail all the work that she does around the house, the menial jobs, the cooking and serving, just being at the ready for whatever is asked of her.Her daughter, Jessica, does make contact arranging to meet her mother at the airport but not wanting to go to stay where Val lives. We know that there is going to be some conflict. Jessica seems to be very self-possessed, and not wanting to take any patronising or humiliating attitudes and behaviour from the wealthy family. She resents her mother doing this kind of work and is really upset at one stage when she feels her mother does not defend her against the criticisms of the family.

In the middle of the film, especially when the mother is injured in an accident which bring on various tantrums, one is tempted to say that they all deserve what they get.

However, this is a very women-oriented film, from the writer-director, to Val herself, to Jessica, to the mother – with the men, like Val’s husband, off-screen, or the father of the household taking to his bed and, quietly and desperately proposing to Jessica. The son will go out on his own (pleasingly, to Australia for six months) but he has been molly-coddled by Val and her affection and the interprets his mother’s lack of feeling and disdain to her thinking he was a dumb. Val has really been his first mother rather than his second mother.

When a new piece of information is given about 15 minutes before the end, we can well guess what is about to happen – and it does.

Many audiences have responded feeling me to Val and her life as well as to interest in Brazilian society and issues of class.

1. The two titles? The focus on the mother? The question about the mother and her service?

2. The Brazilian film, slice of life, Brazilian culture, classes? The 21st-century perspective?

3. The city of San Paolo, the mansion, the grounds of the pool, the interiors, the poorer areas of the city, the views of the city? The musical score?

4. Val’s story? The imposing presence of Regina Case, her seeing herself as a maid, caring for everyone, for the son, over 10 years, the work, helping, the detailed collage of all her house work, the other workers and sharing with them, her timetable? Her interactions with Barbara, Carlos, Fabinho?

5. Her back story, leaving her husband, 10 years away, absence from Jessica, the years without contact, her visits, gifts, time between phone calls, her expressing more love for Fabinho than Jessica, Jessica’s arrival, at the airport, her unwillingness to go to the house?

6. Barbara, dominant, concerned about her appearance, her exercise and gym, television interview, a member of society, her birthday party, the guests and their not even thanking Val? Her relationship with her son, his willing to be expressive, but not embracing her? Her accident and the aftermath? Allowing Jessica to come, tolerating her, the room, but the experience of Jessica with the boys in the pool, saying there was a rat? Class distinctions? Jessica in the kitchen, breakfast? Barbara wanting her to go, cleaning the pool, Jessica and the exams, her son and his testing his answers, failing the exam, Val and her consolation, Barbara wondering about his not hugging her? Allowing Val to leave?

7. Carlos, quiet, sleeping in his room, silent, the strange proposal to Jessica and his saying it was a joke? Giving her the money gift? At the end, preferring to stay in bed?

8. Fabinho, his age, with Val as a little boy, being spoilt, baby-like, Val’s treatment of him, his going into her room for security? With Jessica, the pool? Going to the exam, his bad results, his weeping? His mother’s reaction, his thinking that she thought he was dumb? The decision to go to Australia?

9. Jessica, growing up, Val’s absence, Sandra looking after her, her clashes with her father? Val sending the money? The phone calls and the time between calls? Her arrival, assertive, the airport, the guest room, breakfast, eating Fabinho’s ice cream? Reactions, the room, packing, the prospective room and failing to get it, her return? On the floor, Barbara posting her? Jessica’s anger towards the family, class prejudices, her mother being humiliated? The exam, her doing very well? The revelation about Jorge, Val deciding to leave, going to stay with Jessica, to be a grandmother for the baby?

10. Val, the ingrained attitude towards being a servant, loyalties, decorum? The character, the past? A love for Fabinho? Her work, loyalty to Barbara, the birthday gift and Barbara’s discarding it? Meeting Jessica at the airport? Coping, not understanding her daughter, the mattress, the guest room, Jessica reprimanding her mother for not defending her? The exam, her joy and Jessica’s success? Going into the pool, leaving the phone message, playfully? The decision to leave? Taking the thermos and the cups? Moving, settling into the house – and looking after the baby as a loving grandmother?

SWISS ARMY MAN


US, 2016, 97 minutes, Colour,
Paul Dano, Daniel Radcliffe, Mary Elizabeth Winstead.
Directed by Daniels/ Dan Kwan, Daniel Scheinert.


Probably, a Swiss Army Man, with his Swiss Army Knife, might be ready for any difficult situation he finds himself in. But, probably not nearly as difficult as the situation Hank (Paul Dano) finds himself in, stranded on a remote island in the Pacific, despairing, the noose around his neck, his feet slipping and dangling… as he notices a body floating ashore.

Are we supposed to think about Robinson Crusoe, and wonder whether the stranded body will be a Man Friday? Are we supposed to supposed to remember Tom Hanks and his ball, Wilson, in Castaway? Given that the two writers and directors of this film have made some comedies with the touch of the absurd, it seems quite likely.

The dead man is Manny, giving Daniel Radcliffe extraordinary opportunity to play dead and, at various times, a living dead, though not a zombie. Hank is overjoyed at the possibility of a companion, even enjoying a jet-propelled excursion over the sea and back to the beach.

It is probably important to focus on the background of the jet-propelling. All the reviewers and, one presumes, all the viewers, will have something to say about Intestinal gases.They recur, and recur, and often noisily and prolonged, stomach rumblings and farting. In fact, they are a symbol or a sign of life. So, Manny seems to have some life in him even though he is expelling it.

Hank, in his excitement, carries Manny around the island, up the cliffs into a cave, propping him up, excited when Manny open is his eyes and begins to speak. As, Claude Rains says at the end of Casablanca, “this could be the beginning of a beautiful friendship”! And, it is.

From these paragraphs, readers will note that there is a touch of realism and more than a touch of the surreal – with the screenplay moving into fantasy. And so the question of who is really dead and who is really alive? Depending on your psychological predilections, interpreting these events from a Jungian point of view or a Freudian point of view, it could be said that the interplay between the two characters is Hank having dialogue with Manny as his inner self.

Hank is on a quest, even though he admits that as he began to hang himself his life did not appear before his eyes. Rather, what he has needed is this interplay between Manny and himself, Manny having no memories of his own, Hank being persuaded to talk about himself, his parents, his growing up, his shyness, the image of Sarah on his mobile phone and his taking it surreptitiously in a bus. A sex magazine provides the occasion for discussions about sexuality, about male response, erections and masturbation.

In the interplay between the two, Hank enters into some kind of role-play where he tries to identify with Sarah and Manny responds, indicating some issues of sexual identity as well as of friendship.

For most of the film, it is a blend of comedy and drama, a two-hander. A number of other people do come into the film at the end, especially Mary Elizabeth Winstead as Sarah. But, by this stage, our imaginations have been exercised, making us wonder about locations and the island and a forest, the attack of a savage bear, Manny and his being considered dead, Hank’s father coming on the scene – as well as medics, police, and a television interviewer and camera crew.

On the one hand, a lot of the dialogue reminds us of our mundane human life. On the other hand, from death to life, this interior dialogue, touches on the existential themes of being human.

Needless to say, some audiences have walked out – while many others are putting it on their list of cult films.

1. A film breaking through expectations? The variety of responses? For many a cult film?

2. Writer-directors, their imagination, their portrayal of the fantasies, absurd, introspective, the touch of juvenilia, the existential, mundane? An exploration of the self?

3. The island, remote, the terrain, the beach, the sea, the cliffs and caves, the forests, the animals, the bear? The transition at the end of the film into the California suburbs?

4. The blend of the real and the surreal? The narrative as real, transition to magical realism? Transitions to fantasy, to the absurd, to Hank’s imagination? The personal journey? From strangeness to understanding?

5. The film’s reputation for the gas and wind episodes, humour, gasses as signs of life, public and private, Hank’s breaking wind publicly at the end as a sign of transition? Self-acceptance?

6. The film as earthy, the gas, food, issues of masturbation, erections – a humorous treatment, with serious implications? Hank’s explanations, Manny’s experience?

7. Paul Dano as Hank, his age, the back story, glimpsing him in the bus, his reserve, taking the photo of Sarah? Discovering the items, the amount of debris, his scrounging? No explanation of how it got there? The discussions about life coming before one’s eyes in death? The attempts to hang himself? Seeing Manny, Hank dropping, taking his belt and trying again – but getting up? Manny as a sign a life?

8. Manny dead, age, appearance, the gas experiences, Hank’s reaction, attempts to revive Manny? Going out to sea, the exhilaration of the ride? Coming back in, carrying him, falling, propping him up, trying conversations? The mountains and into the cave?

9. Psychological interpretation – and dialogue between Hank and his inner self? Manny as his alter ego? Jungian and Freudian interpretations? Who was alive, who was dead? And coming to life?

10. The interactions, the beginnings of friendship? Manny, his eyes, consciousness, stilted way of talking, the water coming from his mouth, and Hank drinking it? No memories? The issue of the phone, the image, the batteries – ultimate revelation that it belonged to Hank? Magazine, sex, fantasies, Manny aroused, not knowing what it meant? Hank, talk about masturbation, his father, his mother and her urging him to catch up – and her death? Hank and his deep longings?

11. Manny’s wanting to recover memories? Hank’s memories? His parents? The importance of the song, singing? The two and their playing together?

12. The role play, Hank and address, the flirting, sitting in the bus? Later kissing? Themes of love, friendship?

13. Hank wanting to be rescued, the accidents, the animals, eating the berries and being sick, the huge bear, the confrontation? The bite on the leg?

14. Manny, his capacity for spitting out and projecting, the arrow going to the height?

15. The effect on Hank, co-dependence? The forest, the car, the suburbs? In the backyard? The daughter, Sarah, the ;puzzle? The phone and her photo?

16. Manny dead, Paul’s father coming to identify the body? Unable to?

17. Hank, police, medicos, the TV host and the cameras? His explanation? Mannys’s body, going down the hill? The beach, breaking wind, the body out to sea?

18. Hank, alive or dead at the end?

MIDNIGHT MARY

US, 1933, 74 minutes, Black and white.
Loretta Young, Ricardo Cortez, Franchot Tone, Andy Divine, Una Merkel, Charlie Grapewin.
Directed by William A. Wellman.


Midnight Mary is perhaps title too far. While Loretta Young, looking beautiful and often glamorous, becomes involved with criminals, she is not exactly a criminal whose nickname should be midnight.

Loretta Young and Una Merkel portray two young women, poor, looking for opportunities, not wise in their choices, becoming involved with gangster Ricardo Cortez.

Franchot Tone is a wealthy lawyer, is attracted to Mary, and she moves away from the gangsters and trains and works as a secretary. A chance encounter with the gangsters means that she separates herself from the lawyer, becomes involved with crimes, serves a prison sentence, and kills the gangster when he intends to kill the lawyer.

In great gallantry, the lawyer comes to her rescue just after she is been found guilty.

An early film from celebrated director, especially of air action films, William A. Wellman.

1. A 1930s Depression and gangster story? American cities, employment, crime, courts, prison?

2. MGM production values, black-and-white photography, gangsters headquarters, lawyers, restaurants, courts? Musical score?

3. The title, Mary and her reputation?

4. The opening, Mary in court, prosecuted, accused of killing? The court official, kind to her, his office? Reminiscences? The flashbacks, the indication of different years, the cumulative effect of seeing Mary’s life and downfall?

5. Mary is young, with Bunny, poor, lacking opportunities? Young and immature? Getting caught up with gangsters?

6. Mary, Leo and his attraction? Her response? Bunny, drinking, flirtation, pregnancy?

7. Mary, leaving Leo, the encounter with Tom, the mutual attraction? The decision to study, typist, secretary, the bond with Tom? Prospects?

8. The new encounter with Leo, her telling Tom she did not love him? The disappearance?

9. Mary, wealth, clothes, participating in the jobs, the robberies, on the lookout? The police? Her arrest? Sentenced to jail? Coming out?

10. Leo, personality, henchmen, tough? The attraction to Mary? The jealousy of Tom?

11. Sam, goofy, Tom’s friend? The irony of his being killed in the car instead of Tom?

12. Leo, learning the truth, determination to kill Tom, the confrontation with Mary, the gun, shooting him? In court? Found guilty?

13. Tom, interrupting the court, his reputation as a lawyer, his declaration of love for Mary, the explanation that she killed Leo to save him? And a nice happy ending?

OUR KIND OF TRAITOR

UK, 2016, 108 minutes, Colour.
Ewan Mc Gregor, Stellan Skarsgaard, Damian Lewis, Naomie Harris, Jeremy Northam, Mark Gattis, Khalid Abdalla, Saskia Reeves.
Directed by Susanna White.

Our Kind of treat Traitor is another film version of John Le Carre spy novel. The film versions are always welcome – although some audiences may find this bit lower key.

It Is over 50 Years since John Le Carre began writing novels and films were made. It is half a century since Richard Burton was The Spy Who Came in from the Cold. This means that Le Carre has taken his readership through the decades of the Cold War, to the collapse of communism, through British espionage, through Russian espionage, to wider horizons including Africa and more internationally with The Night Manager Manager and this film.

Audiences who like a variety of international locations will enjoy an opening in Moscow, the setting of the drama in Morocco, transfer to London, Swiss variety with the use of locations in Berne, including the Einstein Museum, and then out into the Alps.

By 2016, the subject of the Le Carre story is International money laundering, this time by the Russian Mafia who are on the lookout for establishing a bank to do their laundering in London. It seems they have several British politicians in their pocket – the kind of mercenary traitor that they can rely on. On the other hand, they have a traitor from within their own ranks, the man who manages the money and signs the documents, not their kind of traitor but one who could be welcomed by MI6.

At the centre of the film is a rather quiet British couple, on holiday in Morocco, some tensions in their marriage, but drawn into international intrigue which actually makes better persons of them, standing on principle and helping others and drawing them closer to each other. Ewan Mc Gregor is Perry, not your everyday hero but the everyday citizen who can become one. He teaches Politics at London University. His wife, Gail, played by Naomie Harris, is a prominent London barrister.

Into their lives comes the boisterous, extraordinarily boisterous Stellan Skarsgaard as the Mafia accountant, Dima. Very early in the film, he passes a memory stick to Perry who experiences MI6 officials at Heathrow on his return. The leader is Hector, played by Damian Lewis who got in a lot of rehearsal time for this kind of role in the TV series, Homeland. He has his eye on the chief treacherous British politician, Jeremy Northam, but is unable to persuade his boss, Mark Gattis, to give him permission to pursue the case.

Which means that he does and there are meetings in Paris, tracking of the Russian criminals, rendezvous after a tennis match with Dima giving information but wanting his wife and children to be taken to England and protection.

But, not enough information handed over, so a transition to Switzerland where the film becomes more suspenseful and with some action.

Because this is a Le Carre story, there is not a completely happy ending – but, symbolically and with some subtlety, the final image is a contemporary version of T. S. Elliott’s lines from The Waste Land about the processiion of people over London Bridge, and the implied unsettlement in society.

1. The popularity of the novels of John Le Carre? Film versions? 50 years of novels and films? The history of espionage, especially the UK, USSR, and changes since the fall of communism?

2. The 21st-century story, the Russian Mafia, British politics, MI6, money laundering, payoffs, betrayal?

3. The title, preferring to deem are, attracted to the Russian Mafia, the British parliamentarians and the approval of the bank for money laundering?

4. The variety of settings, Morocco, London, Paris, Berne, the mountains? The musical score?

5. The opening in Moscow, Prince, the plan for the bank, his talking about his inheritance, his underling and the gift of the gun? The ballet, the audiences? The drive to the countryside, the roadblock, the brutality of the killing, the pursuit of the girl in the snow?

6. Morocco, Perry and Gail, an ordinary couple, professor of poetics, barrister? Initial sexual encounter, the difficulties? Going for the drink, sharing, Dima and his looking at the couple, Perry and his interest, Gail going back to the hotel, the invitation, Perry going to the party, the drinking, the atmosphere, the attractive woman? The plan for tennis, Dima, playing with the children, his wife, the little girls orphans from the murder in the snow? Dima giving Perry the memory stick?

7. Dima, boisterous character, his work for the Russian Mafia, the accounts? His wife and children? Tennis? Concern about his daughter? The money, the bank, the bribes? Getting his family out getting them protection?

8. Perry and Gail, the return to England, passport difficulties? Hector and Luke, the interrogations?

9. Hector, Billy as the head of MI6? Going to the Emirates Stadium? Tracking the politician, the information about him? Hector trying to persuade Billy? Billy forbidding the enquiry, the political difficulties between the UK and Russia? Hector lying to his associates? Continuing the pursuit?

10. Hector, his visits, persuading Perry and Gail to go to Paris, that cover? The alleged coincidence with Dima in Paris? The Russians and their suspicions? The tennis game, the meeting in the dressing room, Hector and Dima and the information, Hector saying it was not enough? Needing the account numbers rather than the list of names provided?

11. Perry and Gail, the Russian giving the lift, suspicious, the delay in the house with the baby, the getting out, the feeling of threat? The two becoming much more involved in the situation? The change of heart for each, becoming stronger, principles and convictions, and mutual love and respect?

12. The gathering in Berne, the beauty of the city, the signing of the document, Prince and his being jovial, the gift of the gun to Dima? Dima, boisterous, the signing of the document? The irony of the scene with the credit card and his memorising the numbers? His memorising the list of accounts?

13. The Berne meetings, the role of the Russians, Dima’s wife and children going with Gail to the Einstein Museum? The escape? Dima in the kitchen, Perry coming to help, the fight, deaths? Driving to the safe house? The cover car and trucks?

14. At the safe house, Anna, age, pining for her boyfriend, phoning him? The Russians tracking down the location of the safe house? The attack, Luke being wounded, Dima out in the forest, the pursuit, Perry killing his attacker? The family moving again?

15. The politician, his arrogance, confronting Hector? The amount of money received as a bribe, his presence in Berne? Billy and his reaction to the failed attempt?

16. The plan with a helicopter, Billy’s intervention? Dima persuading Perry not to go? The helicopter exploding?

17. Reactions, the grief of Dima’s wife? The boys, Anna and her pregnancy and her reaction?

18. Back in London, the family safe? The failure of the mission?

19. Perry visiting Hector, Hector and his cooking, the story of his son and being in jail for drug dealing? The gift of the gun, Hector examining it, finding the list of the accounts?

20. The ending of the film – not showing any vindictive retribution or arrests? The people moving over London Bridge – and echoes of Perry’s lecture about T.S.Eliott and the
Waste Land and society at the time, the crowds of people, discontent and corruption?

21. A satisfying Le Carre experience?

DEMOLITION

US, 2015, 101 minutes, Colour.
Jake Gyllenhaal, Naomi Watts, Chris Cooper, Judah Lewis.
Directed by Jean- Marc Vallee.

While there is a lot of physical demolition going on in this film, especially in waving sledgehammers and breaking through walls as well as the destruction of quite a luxury house and its appointments, what happens is some psychological demolition.

The film opens with a sudden crash and the death of Julia, the wife of businessman, Davis, played with quite some intensity by Jake Gyllenhaal. He is in his mid-30s and the film offers an exploration of what can happen emotionally, psychologically, professionally in terms of the workplace, on a man able and unable to deal with shock and grief.

His father-in-law, played by Chris Cooper, has not always been supportive and becomes more and more bewildered by what Davis says and does, withdrawing from the company, going his own way.

An unusual, if strange, script device is that after the death of his wife, Davis tries to get an M and M bar from a vending machine in the hospital and it fails to come out. Davis notes and photographs the registration number and begins a very personal correspondence with the company, a device by which he can pour out some of his feelings to the anonymous recipient.

Davis visits the company, meets the boss, and is contacted by the personal services officer, Karen, played by Naomi Watts. She is in a relationship with the boss but is more concerned about her precocious young adolescent son, Chris, who is rebellious, concerned about his sexual orientation, critical of his mother.

One day, Davis passes workmen doing demolition work and pays them so that he can join them. He buys tools, clothing, and enters into the demolition work with great gusto. He writes more letters and Karen follows them up, inviting him to her house while her partner is away, enabling them to communicate (not sexually) and for him to start bonding with her son, giving him a salutary talk about appropriate and inappropriate use of the F word and listening to him about his identity worries.

As the film goes on, and Davis keeps imagining his dead wife present to him, it might seem that there is no way for him to go. A chance meeting with an old man who works on old carousels finally gives him a lead for some way of dealing with the death of his wife, the animosity of his father-in-law, and a philanthropic way of keeping his wife’s memory alive.

Some years ago, American psychologist, Carol S. Pearson, wrote a book about personal archetypes, Awakening the Hero Within. One of her life crises is that for authenticity, a crisis that comes in middle-age, and one of the archetypes she names is The Destroyer. Demolition is a fine illustration of what she was exploring with this archetype, the negative side where the destruction simply leads to collapse, but where the positive side leads to greater self-awareness and the possibilities for new beginnings.

Despite the seeming impossibility, the film does end with Davis appreciating some new authenticity and steps to a more positive future phase of his life. The film is directed by Canadian, Jean- Marc Vallee, known for The Dallas Buyers Club and Wild.

1. The title: destruction, possibilities of new beginnings?

2. An American story, the American city, the house and its modern style, offices, the streets, the building sites, the poorer areas, hospital? The city? The musical score?

3. Introduction of Davis and Julia talking, his seeming to be detached, the conversation, tension? The suddenness of the crash? In hospital, the impact of Julia’s death?

4. Davis, the aftermath of the death, the vending machine, failing? Noting the number, photographing it? The beginning of the writing letters, the enormous amount of detail, an outlet for his feelings? Device for the film? The consequences?

5. Jake Gylenhaal as Davis, his age, his career, marriage, as a character, his past, the relationship with Julia, with her father, mother? Whether her father liked him or not? In the business, the scenes in the office? The later revelation about Julia being pregnant, the abortion, her mother knowing?

6. Davis’s collapse, grief, anguish, not knowing what happened? Demolition of his psyche? His behaviour, opting out, rejecting his own house, at the funeral, withdrawing? Continuing letters to Karen? His visit to the company, the encounter with Carl? Karen making contact? His response, seeking her out, the close relationship, the Platonic aspects? Meeting Chris, Chris’s attitude, rebellion towards his mother, his language, the appropriate uses of ‘fuck’, Chris and his concern about his sexual or orientation? His behaviour, in the bathroom, the lipstick, clothes, lipstick on the mirror…? Davis and the discussions, his playing with Chris and creating the bond?

7. The establishment of the foundation, the interview with the contenders, the swimming champion? Davis’s response, inviting Karen to the social, Karen and her laughter at the winner because of his inappropriate comments to her, sexigts? Her leaving? Reactions?

8. Davis, his tools, fixing things? Passing the site with the demolition, paying the workmen to join in, the destruction of the house and its liberation for him, the nail in his foot?

9. Coney Island, the old man and the carousel, talking, wanting to repair it?

10. Carl, his return, clash with Davis, the fight, the warning? Karen leaving him?

11. Karen, Chris, his being bashed, Davis helping?

12. Davis and his offer to his father-in-law for a memorial? The transition to the renewed carousel, the ride? Everybody there?

13. Julia appearing to him throughout the film – and her being on the carousel?

14. Demolition leading to rebuilding of himself, his feelings, his personality, capacity for relationship?

BLONDE DYNAMITE

US, 1950, 66 minutes, Black and white.
Leo Gorcey, Huntz Hall, Adele Jergens, Gabriel Dell, Bernard Gorcey.
Directed by William Beaudine.

Blonde Dynamite is one of many small budget supporting features from the late 1940s and early 1950s featuring Leo Gorcey and the Bowery Boys. There is a slight plots, and the impact of the film coming from Gorcy himself in a recurring character, full of self-confidence, but often overreaching himself. His pal is played by Huntz Hall, again a continuing character, dithering, fairly daft and getting into all kinds of trouble. Many of the actors had recurring rules as the Bowery Boys but Gorcey’s own father, the very short Bernard Gorcey, plays Louis, the proprietor of the shop.

Leo Gorcey had come to some notice in the 1930s with the crime drama, Angels with Dirty Faces.

In this film, Gorcey gets the idea of turning his friend Louis’ sweets shop into an office for male escorts (of the 1950s fairly respectable type). However, there are a number of gangsters who have the same interest. They want to dig under the shop into a bank and rob it – threatening the bank assistant, a friend of the boys, and betrayed by Adele Jergens, a moll, and getting the information about the safe from him.

In the meantime, they persuade Louis to go for a holiday with his larger-than-life wife. When he returns to look after shop, the boys had been taken over by the gangsters and are actually doing a lot of the digging, especially Huntz Hall who is given a chunk of rock and told that it is uranium. While the police capture the criminals, everything seems dim for Louis and the boys, it is confirmed that the chunk of rock actually is uranium!

Along with the many other films, of historical interest.

Z FOR ZACHARIAH

US, 2015, 98 minutes, Colour.
Margot Robbie, Chiwitel Ejiofor, Chris Pine.
Directed by Craig Zobel.

At one stage in this film, a book is shown, A for Adam. The implication is that these people, survivors of an apocalyptic experience, are A, the last on earth.

This is a very quiet post-apocalyptic film, a three-hander. The setting (filmed in New Zealand) is an American mountain location, hills and valleys, waterfalls and lakes, a peaceful setting. Down below is a ruined world, yet shops still there with their contents. There has been overall atomic contamination.

The central character is Anne, played by Margot Robbie, young woman who has survived, is making good, is planting crops, self-sufficient, getting some stores from the shops, making do.

The next character is an engineer played by Chiwitel Ejiofor, who has survived the disaster by being one mile down in the mine, travelling alone, encountering and, a confrontation at first, saving him from contaminated water, nursing him to health, his helping her on the farm, preparing the tractor and planning a mill wheel at the waterfall to provide electricity. There is a mutual attraction although he is considerably older.

Into this world comes a third character, Caleb, played by Chris Pine. He is given hospitality, joins in the work of dismantling a church, the church belonging to Anne’s father, which she at first does not want to desecrate. Caleb helps with the building of the mill wheel and its installation – although he and Anne are retracted; they do spend an night together. While he is working on the wheel, he slips, is saved by John, but slips again – and John tells Anne that he has moved on, leaving the two together to their future and survival.

1. A post-apocalyptic drama – a three-hander without the special effects and actions of so many post-apocalyptic big budget thrillers?

2. Audience acceptance of the world contaminated by radiation, the effect on so many communities, being wiped out, small pockets of clean air in the mountains, yet waterfalls with contaminated water, deserted shops, cars and farm machinery, small resources capitalised on?

3. The setting, the mountains and valleys, the fertile fields, growing vegetables? The farm machinery and its use? The house, the barn? The church? The musical score?

4. Anne surviving, her brother going out to search for survivors and John Loomis’s story of his contamination and being killed? Her father, farmer, preacher? Her respect for the church, prayer, faith, grace before meals…? Surviving in the house, going to the shop, stores, fire, candles, cooking? Alone? Her character?

5. The arrival of John Loomis, and apprehensions, the gun, the threats? His washing in the water, her warning him about the contamination, his illness, looking after him? His back story, engineer, the mine, one mile down, surviving, his journey? And seeing his vehicle, bringing it to the house?

6. John, his character, age, experience, handy with jobs, with the farming? Repairing the tractor? The plan for the waterfall and electricity? His wanting to bring down the church for the timber, Anne and her reluctance? The growing friendship, reliance, easy situations in the house? The attraction? His patience and not imposing himself? Anne’s response?

7. The surprise arrival of Caleb? His age, personality? His story? His asking for help, little radiation? And bringing him into the house, sharing the meals? His working with John, the dismantling of the church, building the wheel? Setting up the wheel, for the electricity? Caleb and the rope, his slipping, his fall – and John’s responsibility?

8. Caleb and Anne, the attraction, the night together? The effect on Anne, on Caleb, on John? John’s motivation and Caleb’s death?

9. John, explaining that Caleb had gone, leaving the two of them together – to what future?

10. A different perspective on post--apocalyptic – and the will to survive and the resourcefulness needed?