GOON

US, 2012, 92 minutes, Colour.
Seann William Scott, Jay Baruchel, Alison Pill, Leiv Schreiber, Eugene Levy, Marc- Andre Grandin, Kim Coates, Nicholas Campbell.
Directed by Michael Dowse.

Goon gives the impression of being a very tough title – and, it is.

It is an ice hockey story, in the steps of Slap Shot, the main ice hockey film starring Paul Newman. While there is a lot of sport, there is also a lot of physical combat to prevent opponents making their play.

Seann William Scott, best known for the American Pie film character, Stiffler, plays a benign young man, a bit slow, comparison is made with his doctor father (Eugene Levy) and his gay adoptive brother. But he has strong hands and works as a bouncer. He has a close friend, Jay Baruchel who co-wrote the screenplay with Evan Goldberg, the regular collaborator with Seth Rogen. The friend has his own radio program on hockey.

The coach of the local team sees the young man solve a problem with his fists, offers him a job even though he does not know how to play hockey or to skate. Part of his responsibility is to protect a young player who had been brutally downed by a tough opponent, played surprisingly by Leiv Schreiber, and the confrontation between Scott and Schreiber is inevitable.There is a romantic interest with Alison Pill.

The film mainly of interest for a macho audience, and the fans of ice hockey – and it’s combat.

1. At The audience for this film? Hockey fans, sports fans? Films of tough combat?

2. The setting, the town, family and homes, clubs and bouncers, the streets, ice rinks, hockey clubs, games, dressing rooms? The musical score?

3. The tough tone of the film, explicit language, crunching fights…?

4. The story of a loser finding himself? Doug, his age, experience, somewhat slow, compared with his adoptive father as a doctor, his gay adoptive brother? The strength in his hands? His work as a bouncer, seeing this in action? Yet a kind disposition?

5. And Doug’s family, the father and his medical expectations, the mother, the gay brother?

6. Doug, the problem in the stands, using his fists? The coach, seeing Doug, interested, approaching him, offering him the job?

7. Doug, not skilled in hockey, not skilled in skating? Joining the team? His practice, getting skills? His role in the team? The combat role? The coach deciding whether he would go on or not? The knockout blows?

8. Doug, friends with Pat, Pat and his hockey interests, his radio program, the expletive style, communicating, the fans? His support Doug?

9. The character of Ross Rhea, hockey champion, arrogant, bashing people? The interaction with Xavier, knocking him down, demoralising him? His play for the team, preparation for retirement? Talking with Doug in the diner? The buildup to the fight? The means, dirty tricks, the violence? His having to concede to Doug?

10. Doug, the meeting with Eva, her work, interest in him, the relationship?

11. The fans, his brother coming, supporting him? The fans in the stands and cheering him on?

12. The character of Xavier, his play, Champion, defeated by Ross Rhea? On the outer? His character, Doug protecting him, supporting and encouraging him?

13. Is this the true world of ice hockey?

DEADLY IMPACT

US, 2010, 96 minutes, Colour.
Sean Patrick Flannery, Joe Pantoliano, Carmen Serano, David House, Greg Serano, Julianne Florez.
Directed by Robert Kurtzman.

Deadly Impact is something of a routine FBI thriller, the pursuit of a shrewd and deadly assassin who calls himself simply a thief. it is a star vehicle for Sean Patrick Flannery as an officer who has had to make a decision about killing his wife so that other people could be saved, the consequences and his drowning his sorrows in Mexico.

He is approached by an FBI agent, played by Carmen Serano, who is able to persuade him to come back to Albuquerque where the initial action took place. The criminal is arrogant, clever with disguises, absolutely ruthless in killing people including a hotel explosion killing all the guests. He is played by Joe Pantoliano.

The film shows the working of the FBI, surveillance, clues, analysis of photos, interrogation of associates, lie detectors… There are some twists as the criminal is an assassin and his attempt on a senator was thwarted earlier and he is now wreaking revenge on everyone who stopped him.This includes abducting the daughter of the hero’s associate (Greg Serano, husband of Carmen Serano in real life), leading to a confrontation, the seeming repetition of the opening sequence – but a twist with the defeat of the villain.

1. Police thriller? Personal drama?

2. New Mexico, the city of Albuquerque, Apartments, police precincts, hotels, the streets? Authentic atmosphere? The scenes in Mexico, the dingy bar? The musical score?

3. The title, accurate? The number of deaths? The importance of situations where individuals have to make life and death decisions, accepting that some people must die? The repercussions on the individual?

4. The set up, the Lion, his reputation, Tom Armstrong and his years of pursuing him? Getting close? The Lion and his taking Tom’s wife, tying her up, Tom having to shoot her to stop the explosion, to save everyone else? This happening offscreen? The transition to 8 years later and the effect on Tom, leaving New Mexico, drinking in the bar?

5. The FBI officer, tracking Tom down, talking, asking him to come back, the effect on Tom, his return? Going to the bar? The surveillance?

6. The revelation of the character of the Lion, David Kaplow, age, appearance, calling himself a thief, his being an assassin? Plans, the assassination of the senator, the failure, his wanting revenge on the FBI, on Tom, on the senator?

7. Tom, the explosion, pursuing the criminals, held by the police? The FBI, working with Tom? Working with?

8. The details of the FBI work, detection, surveillance, information, photos, Tom finding the identity of Kaplow?

9. His disguises, pretending to be the worker, the tiles and their being impregnated with explosives? His phone calls, his arrogance? His discussions with Amy, her giving all the information? His taking her father, the threats to her father? The explosion and the deaths in the hotel? His blaming the FBI?

10. The build up to the climax? His store room, Isabel going to look at the room, Kaplow and his disguise and his taking her? Hostage? Tying her up as he had Tom’s wife?

11. The FBI trying to get out of the building, the snipers, the interrogation of one of the snipers? The smokescreen, the FBI chief being wounded?

12. Tom, having the address, driving to the site, the confrontation with Kaplow, the fight? Kaplow winning, wanting the vest? The time limit, Tom getting free from the cuffs, his phone call to Kaplow? The irony of the vest in the explosion?

13. The assassination of the senator, Tom’s friend, the betrayal for his daughter? His death?

14. Popular ingredients for police and FBI thriller?

MARILYN HOTCHKISS' BALLROOM DANCING & CHARM SCHOOL

US, 2006, 104 minutes, Colour.
Robert Carlyle, John Goodman, Marisa Tomei, Mary Steenburgen, Eldon Henson, Sean Aston, Danny DeVito?, Cameron Mannheim, Octavia Spencer,
Directed by Randall Miller.

Ballroom dancing films are cropping up more frequently.

In the Strictly Ballroom tradition, there have been the documentary Mad Hot Ballroom about teaching primary school children dancing as a way of increasing their self-esteem and social skills. Then there was the feature film based on this story, but making the children seniors in school, with Antonio Banderas in Take the Lead. After that, Step Up. In the meantime, what has Marilyn Hotchkiss to teach us?

Marilyn Hotchkiss ran a small dance school in the early 1960s in Pasadena. Earnest mothers sent their 12 year olds to her lessons so that their children could become better-mannered and learn, as Marilyn Hotchkiss put it in the title of her school, some ‘charm’.

We actually learn this from a dying man. John Goodman portrays Steve Mills whom we first see overtaking a bread delivery van (driven by Frank Keane, played by Robert Carlyle) in the mountains. He crashes and the ambulance people tell Frank to keep Steve conscious by talking with him. Steve confides that he is on his way to keep an appointment from forty years earlier, that he will meet Lisa Gobar at the school on 5-05-05.

The film’s action keeps moving backwards and forwards. It visualises the kids in 1962, playing British Bulldog as they chased and bashed into each other, their transformation through the dance classes and Steve’s growing infatuation with Lisa. It also shows us Frank standing in for Steve and searching for Lisa at the school now run by Marianne Hotchkiss (a very gracefully dancing Mary Steenburgen), Marilyn’s daughter.

The classes are run very formally but Frank finds a new home, a sympathetic partner, Meredith (Marisa Tomei) who is chaperoned rather possessively (and violently) by her stepbrother, Randall (Donnie Wahlburg).

It should be said that Frank, while being a fine baker, is a rather inarticulate widower who attends group sessions of similarly grieving men (with some amusing and poignant scenes of their discussions).

Frank’s life is transformed. He gradually lets go of his obsessive grieving, discovers how light he is on his feet, appreciates his growth in both ballroom dancing and charm.

What makes our response to the characters more complex is that Frank continually remembers his conversation with Steve and we see Steve’s childhood memories as he tells Frank his story.

Where audiences will enjoy the film, not only with the frequent dance sequences, is with the range of characters who turn up week after week for their lessons. After Randall acts violently towards Frank, he is forbidden to come to the school. He explains that this weekly class is the happiest time in his life, that this is his world. While we don’t get to know all the characters, we see the school as their haven. As might be expected, the widowers all follow Frank’s example and the dance seems better therapy than all the talk.

This is not a great film. Rather it is a nice one. It emphasises how much grief there is in the world and how, as the dying Steve reminisces, we take wrong turns, left when we should have gone right (and there is a bit of a twist at the end when we learn who Steve really is). It also reminds us that there is some decency in everyone if only they had the opportunity to show it.

There is a fate (which we would call providence) insofar as Frank is at the scene of Steve’s crash and his simple act of ringing for the ambulance and travelling in it, listening and asking questions, is the means of transforming his life.

This is a film for older audiences and the old-fashioned, whatever their age.

1. A pleasing drama? Humane film? Dance film? The focus on the title?

2. The Los Angeles settings, the locations, streets and homes, the baker? The ballroom and the interiors? The musical score, the dance music?

3. The focus on Frank, the death of his wife, his work as a baker, the effect of the death, depression? The car accident, the encounter with Steve? Steve asking him to contact the friend? Going to the ballroom? The friend not there?

4. Steve’s story, the accident, his friend, plot going back to his childhood? The building up of his character?

5. The strong cast, the many prestige supporting players? Mary Steenburgen and the title of the film?

6. Frank, his meeting Meredith, thinking Randall her boyfriend, Randall as a bully, the rivalry? Randall as Meredith’s step brother? Frank, liking the music and the dancing, his therapy group? The therapy helping him to make a stance?

7. The range of different members of the group? Their characters, interactions? Coming to the ballroom, participation?

8. The audience finding out more and more about Frank, the death of his wife, the suicide, his feeling guilty?

9. Frank and Meredith, her explaining Randall, the violent father? The bond between the two? The dancing, the relationship?

10. The issue of the ashes, Frank seeking out Steve’s friend, the seeming indifference to receiving the ashes – but the glimpse of the tear?

11. Frank, as a character, his development, coming out of himself, Meredith, the relationships? A nice film?

MISCHIEF NIGHT

UK, 2006, 93 minutes, Colour.
Kelli Hollis, James Foster, Michael Taylor, Holly Kenny, Jake Hayward, Ramon Tikaram, Qasim Akhtar.
Directed by Penny Woolcock.

Mischief Night, in Yorkshire at least, is the night before Guy Fawkes day. There are fireworks and dances and the kids, who may not yet be initiated into the trick or treat routines of earlier in the week Halloween, go out and get into trouble. This story takes place over the five days before Mischief Night as well as the doings of the night itself.

We are immediately introduced to a completely dysfunctional family, mother with three children from different fathers and the boyfriend who is both manic and obsessive. When their attempt at a family Sunday dinner fail, the kids go up the street and we find that they are in a Pakistani area of town. The film is, therefore, a picture of contemporary Britain and its race divisions and strained relationships.

The following days open out the story so that we see what happens in a Pakistani home, a completely veiled wife and her arranged marriage husband who has spent time in goal, the older parents who have not yet quite come to terms with living in England, the girl who studies As You Like It and tries some freeing Rosalind disguise herself and dreads her own arranged marriage, the little kids and the boy who is mischief prone whose activities almost lead to tragedy.

Meanwhile, links between the white family and the Pakistani family become clearer. It is the mix of urban problems, of sudden pregnancies and absent fathers, of local drug dealing and single mother addicts, of the local king pin and the rivalry of the Pakistani dealer…

Actually, while the film is really serious with an attempt to remind audiences what this world is really like and how people are enmeshed in their daily struggles, it also many funny moments.

Mischief Night eventually turns out to be just that, with potential disaster for everyone. The kingpin and his henchman are up in a hot air balloon and we expect them to come crashing down on the house where the screenplay has contrived to have everyone congregate and where shots are fired. In fact they don’t – although they do next morning get stranded on the minaret of the local mosque.

Writer-director Penny Woolcock has affection for her characters even as she paints them warts and all. We are a far cry from the homogeneous white society of an earlier and forever gone Britain.

1. A film for a British audience? Yorkshire? International audiences?

2. British drama, comic, serious? The title, Mischief Night on 4th November? Children, pranks, mayhem?

3. The Yorkshire setting, the city of Leeds, the different communities, the park separating? Homes, streets? Mosques? The musical score?

4. The English family, mother, children, fathers? Partners? The Pakistani family? Children, parents, grandparents? The different ways of life? Ethnic differences? In a British city?

5. Pakistani family? Asif, his age, relationship with his parents, their thinking he was a good boy, his being on the loose, the car crash? The encounter with Qassim? Drug dealing? His working? The meeting with Kimberly? The differences? Her looking for her father? The crash of the taxi, the decision to kill Qassim? Kimberly willing to help? Getting the gun, to shoot through the window, the distraction, his being hit in the chest but not dying? The consequences for Asif?

6. Kimberly, relationship with her mother, brothers and sisters, her age, wanting to find her father? The meeting with Asif, the gun, her firing the shot? The irony of the revelation that Quassim was her father?

7. Tyler, the robbing of the safe, his grandfather, the golf balls, getting the gun, becoming involved in drug dealing? Finding Jane, the heroin, her abandoned child, drinking the bleach? His compassion? Becoming a father?

8. The imam, Eye Patch? His leadership, role in the mosque, preaching hate and terrorism? Tina and her story about him when he was young, sexual pervert? His beating the kids? The reaction of the liberal Muslims? His wanting to invade the mosque, take control, change the locks?

9. Immie, Asif as his brother, the relationship with Qassim, with Tina? His liberal views, the attack on the imam?

10. The culmination of the events, five days before, mischief night, the two families, the ethnic differences, and street life in a British city?

OPEN SEASON

US, 2006, 83 minutes, Colour.
Voices of: Martin Lawrence, Ashton Kuthcer, Gary's Sinese, Debra Messing, Billy Connolly, Georgia Engel, Jon Favreau, Jane Krakowski, Gordon Tootoosis, Patrick Warburton.
Directed by Roger Allers, Jill Cultin.

Despite 2006 having many (too many?) animated films with talking animals, Open Season is still very enjoyable. It is the first of Sony’s animation company’s films and has been very successful, straddling that strange gap between kids and parents.

What if a bear cub had been brought up by a nurse in a town and lived in a garage with his own en suite? What if he went on a bender in a supermarket, hypo on candy, cookies and sugar with a dopey deer mule that he had rescued from a dastardly hunter named Shaw who could not wait the three days until the start of open season? What would he do if taken out into the wild and found that there was no toilet plumbing?

These and many other questions are amusingly answered in Open Season.

Then it is Open Season declared and the animals who have been mocking the bear are all on the run ahead of the rifles. What would the mayhem be like? This too is amusingly answered.

The film does not take itself too seriously and benefits from Martin Lawrence doing his smart talk as Boog the Grizzly and Ashton Kutcher doing his slacker best as the deer, Elliot. Plenty of other good voices as well, Gary Sinise as the horrible Shaw, Debra Messing as the nurse and Billy Connolly as a Scots squirrel.

The message is clearly anti-hunting and pro-animals but it puts the emphasis on entertaining rather than preaching.

1. The growing popularity of animation films? Children’s audiences? Families? Films about animals? Animals like humans?

2. The visual style, look, the animation and drawings, the backgrounds, the forests and mountains, the animals? The voice cast? The musical score?

3. The issue of hunters, the open season, the stance of the hunters, Shaw and his shooting three days in advance? The animals wanting to outwit the hunters?

4. The town, the zoo, the forests, the mountains, the water? The range of creatures in the forest?

5. The focus on Boog, Martin Lawrence’s voice, the civilised bear, with his own pet bear, living in the house in comfort, en suite? Beth, in control, getting him to perform, the response of the audience? His encounter with Elliot? The supermarket, the sugar binge? His being projected out into the wilderness? His inability to cope? Mishaps?

6. Elliott, the mule-deer, the clash, his broken horn? Escaping from Shaw? Being saved by Boog? Their being stranded in the forest? Elliott, comic, gawky? Ashton Kutcher and his voice?

7. Beth, the human character, the ranger, in control, with Boog, presenting him at the zoo, the audience? Trying to cope with his sugar reaction?

8. In the forest, the range of the other creatures, the different animals, the different accents, French skunks, Scottish squirrels…?

9. Coping in the forest, gathering all the animals, the effect of the dam breaking? The comedy running together? And overcoming the hunters?

ST PETER'S AND THE PAPAL BASILICAS OF ROME

Italy/Vatican, 2016, 95 minutes, Colour.
Directed by Luca Viotto.

For those who have never visited them, an opportunity to see close-ups of Rome’s basilicas. For those who have visited, an opportunity to experience delight again, to reminisce and appreciate.

With the advances in the technology of filming, digital mobility, processes of 3D, it is time for many of the world’s great cities, buildings, artwork, to have their close-up moments.

This film, rather Italianate in its style, with some venerable male experts explaining art and history, the fourth and informative female expert, the propensity for some technical and unfamiliar vocabulary (a comment on Mary as the Theotokos – mother of God), a lot of architects and artists named, and more than a touch of the triumphalist in the perspective on the history of the church, on the Sovereign Pontiff, and a presumption that being in the basilicas will, somehow or other, have such an impact that the visitor and the tourist will understand the church. (One might think: if only!)

With these comments and reservations mentioned, it is best to note what is on offer in this visit to Rome, to the Vatican, to the basilicas. Interspersed throughout the film a quite a number of helicopter shots of Rome, audiences being able to pick out some of the landmarks like the Victor Emanuel Monument, and the helicopter flying along the Tiber up to St Peter’s.

This is a 2016 production, noting the Holy Year of Mercy with images of Pope Francis opening the Holy Doors – followed by a historical outline of the Holy Years, beginning in 1300 with Boniface VIII, the development of pilgrimages to the different basilicas, and the decision to have a holy year every 25 years – this Holy Year of Mercy being an exception.

The commentary offers information about Peter, his preaching in Rome, his death, his grave (though not a visit to the site, the Scavi below), the early basilica, and details of the enormous transformation in the 16th century with Michelangelo and the design of the basilica, Bernini and the colonnades and the piazza, and his contribution to the interiors of the basilica. Audiences will appreciate the long and lingering camera movement over Michelangelo’s Pieta. Those were been to St Peter’s will have their favourite places and images and will have pleasure in the recall.

After St Peters, the visit is to the mother of Catholic churches, the church of the Bishop of Rome, St John Lateran. Once again, time is spent in the piazza, a visit to the baptistery, some historical information about the papal palaces no longer there, then to the interiors and the detail of architecture, artwork. There is also a visit to the nearby Santa Scala, the staircase, allegedly from Jerusalem, which pilgrims mount on their knees.

One of the limitations of the commentary, especially for Christians not familiar with gospel and historical detail, let alone for those who are not Christian, is the presentation of all kinds of traditions which could be heard as factual, some of them Catholic folkloric, about revered characters, like Veronica and her veil and Jesus’ face, the name of Longinus, the centurion who speared Jesus, the authenticity of so many relics to be found in Rome…

The helicopter hovering over a St John Lateran travels up the street to the basilica of St Mary Major, the Marian basilica from the fifth century – with the recounting of the folklore about the site of the basilica and a miraculous fall of snow in August as if it too were factual.

The tour of St Mary Major shows a lavish basilica, the beauty of the artwork, the golden roof and its design, the pillars, the images of Mary, and the mosaic in the apse. As with the other basilicas, there is great detail in the history of the building and its art, the grand and beautiful chapels designed and endowed by popes.

The final visit takes us outside the walls of Rome to the Basilica of St Paul.Many audiences will be surprised to learn of the history of the basilica, its link with the death place of Paul and his grave, the building of churches on the site, the abbey present with the basilica, and the extraordinary fire of 1823 which draw destroyed so much of the basilica. The decision was whether to create something entirely new or to rebuild the basilica exactly as it was – and the latter is what happened.

There is a serenity in the interior of the basilica and even more serenity in the beautiful Cloister, colonnades, gardens and flowers.

An interesting feature of St Paul’s is a long succession of pictures of all the popes, many of which were destroyed in the 1823 fire, the length refurbishing of photo pictures, mosaics, with Pope Francis already in place – and the comment made about many who said that when there was no more room for another papal face, the church would come to an end. A ripple of laughter accompanied the next comment which indicated that recently more space has been made for the pictures of the popes!.

In recent years, cinemas have become the venues for performances of filmed plays, ballets and operas and tours of artworks – the advantage of viewing them all on the big screen, in the cinema/theatre atmosphere and, in this case, with the enhanced techniques of 3-D photography.

OVER THE HEDGE


US, 2006, 83 minutes, Colour.
Voices of: Bruce Willis, Gary Shandling, William Shatner, Nick Nolte, Thomas Haden Church, Alison Janney, Eugene Levy, Catherine O' Hara, Omid Djalilli.
Directed by Tim Johnson and Karey Kirkpatrick.

An ambitious Dreamworks animation comedy based on a popular series of comic strips and comic books.

While the animation is enjoyable, it is fairly normal by recent standards. However, it excels in the fine voice cast, some of whom you would not expect to be in this kind of film. There is Nick Nolte as an upset and grizzly bear. There is Bruce Willis as the star, a con-artist raccoon called RJ. Garry Shandling is the tortoise who leads the mixed community of animals trying to survive. Steve Carrell is the loopy character who provides the manic laughs. Eugene Levy and Catherine O’Hara? are recognisable as an old, cautious couple. William Shatner mouthes wisdom and Wanda Sykes is sassy.

For the human characters, Alison Janney is the dominating suburban housewife and Thomas Haden Church is the pest exterminator.

Actually, humans are the targets of the satire. They are certainly bossy but we see their selfishness, their extravagance and wastefulness through the eyes of hungry animals. We also see that humans are addicted to junk food (but there is a lurking suspicion that the animals who delight in their discovery of the sweet and the savoury, especially through salty chips, are going to be as bad addicts as the humans).

Be that as it may, this is an entertaining story of animals who are led to shed their fears and go beyond the terrifying hedge. It is also the story of a genial rogue who learns about family.

DAS LIED IN MIR/THE DAY I WAS NOT BORN

Germany, 2010, 94 minutes, Colour.
Jessica Schwartz, Michael Gwisdeck, Rafael Ferro.
Directed by Florian Miccoud Cossens.

The English title is much more serious than might be first thought. But, the German title, The Song Inside Me, is an effective one – the central character is a young woman in her late 20s, a champion swimmer, who begins a quest to find out who she really is and who her family is. She hears a woman singing a song at an airport and it evokes long hidden memories and sets her on her journey.

This would be interesting enough in itself, but the story takes us from the comfort of growing up in affluent Germany to memories of the dictatorship in Argentina and the fate of those who were called ‘The Disappeared’. This has been the theme of a number of Argentinian films, Lamb of God and Cautiva. In the latter, there is a school girl who discovers that she was adopted and that officials at the time of the dictatorship had taken possession of her.

This means that films like this are not simply about the search for identity. They have repercussions for the adopting parents, especially if the paths to the adoption were not entirely legal or moral.

Jessica Schwartz holds the audience attention as the young woman deciding, on an impulse after missing a flight connection to Chile, to go to Buenos Aires instead. Michael Gwisdek is the devoted father who has not revealed the past to his daughter and, even flying to join her in Argentina, is still more than hesitant. With the aid of a local policeman (who had wheedled a bribe from her when she reported her passport missing but with whom she has a relationship, meeting his genial father who was in the police at the time she was born), she discovers another family and relishes their company.

Approaching thirty, she already has a full life but has to work out how to incorporate this new awareness, of her murdered parents, of her new relations, into the life she has been used to.

The film has been made with deep feeling and deep concern. The audience shares this. Ecumenical Award in Montreal 2010.

1. The topicality of the film? The Germans? Argentina?

2. The German title, the song, its place in Maria’s memory and consciousness? Its significance? The English title and the emphasis on Maria and her identity, Germany and Argentina?

3. The settings in Argentina, the settings in Germany? The musical score and the song?

4. Maria, the story, aged 31, the background of the late 1970s and early 1980s? A German, young woman, on her way to Chile, having no knowledge of Spanish, her relationship with her father, her background and education in Germany, her being contented with her identity?

5. Hearing the song, the experience, familiarity, the lyrics, not knowing Spanish, singing? The effect, disturbing, the decision to stay in Buenos Aires? Wandering the city, the effect?

6. The phone call to her father? His response, reassurance? His arriving in Buenos Aires? Sudden, the effect on Maria?

7. Their talk, the difficulty for his explanation, Maria and her three years in Argentina, the background of the dictatorship? The killing of her natural parents? Her being sheltered? The wealthy Germans and their adoption of children? Going back to Germany and remembering nothing of her early life? It’s being concealed from her?

8. The people in Buenos Aires, the hotel clerk, at the kiosk, the police, the lazy woman, the joking police?

9. Maria, the decision to search for her parents, the role of her father, his concern about his relationship with his daughter?

10. Aleyandro, helping, genial, interpreter?

11. The details of the search, gathering information, the revelation about the past, the parents’ death, what happened to children, being saved, adopted? The story of her parents’ death?

12. The effect on Maria, on her father? A sense of identity having to cope? Her future relationships?

WARCRAFT

US, 2016, 123 minutes, Colour.
Travis Fimmel, Paula Patton, Ben Foster, Dominic Cooper, Toby Kebbel, Ben Schnetzer, Clancy Brown, Daniel Wu, Ruth Negga, Callum Keith Rennie.
Directed by Duncan Jones.

For the uninitiated, Warcraft sounds like a film about war, obviously, along the lines of such stories as Battleship. And, because it is based on computer games, these audiences may be expecting long sequences of conflict and combat.

Audiences in the know, the great number of fans of the Blizzard Productions, need no introduction. They have played games, seen the television shows, have become familiar with the world of Warcraft, the characters and the struggles. At the end of the press screening (in IMAX and 3 D), and groups sat around during the final credits analysing the carriages and situations there was great enthusiasm about the film and talking with anticipation about sequels.

In many ways it was a pleasure to find that this was a fantasy film in a fantasy world, not so much long, long ago in a distant galaxy but rather long ago in a parallel world.

Of course, this is a film of special effects and CGI, a most impressive: land of the giant Orcs, the contrast with the human world, looking like a mediaeval city and kingdom, the mysterious world of the magic-endowed Guardian and his tower; costumes and decor; and the make up for the creation of the Orcs, giants, teeth tusks, becoming more sinister the more evil they were. There seemed to be no complaints from fans about any of this.

The film opens with the Orcs, in battle with the humans, taking them prisoners. but, the land is arid and the situation, not unlike the opening of Mad Max, Fury Road, with the community in need of fresh water and a home, led by a tyrant, and only magic portal which can open, only when the leader has absorbed the energy from the captive humans, and the Orcs can go through to a new life. The leader of the Orcs is truly ugly and sinister – and continues to behave accordingly. On the other hand, there is Durotan, leader of a clan, his pregnant wife who ultimately gives birth to a son, whom we more than suspect will be a future leader (confirmed towards the end of the film when his mother puts him in a small boat and pushes him to safety on the river, with words that echo those of Marlon Brando’s Jor-el in Superman the Movie, a Moses saviour moment).

Actually, there are many, many references to popular fantasy films which critics may deride as being derivative but which the fans will enjoy identifying and relishing. After all, a good meal depends on an excellent recipe – so, amongst others, audiences will be thinking of The Lord of the Rings, of hobbits and avatars, of Star Wars Creatures, echoes of Star Trek, and prehistoric sagas akin to Conan the Barbarian and other sword and sandal epics as well as parallels with the Knights of the Round Table and an evil Merlin.

Dominic Cooper (rather inexpressive on the whole) is the King who has to face the crisis from the Orcs and the desire to release the humans. Much more vigorous is Travis Fimmel, already at home in televisions The Vikings, who has no difficulty in transition to the leading human warrior, Lothar, expressive, with ingenuity, his young son going into battle. Ben Foster is usually a villain so it is a surprise to find him as the Guardian, Medhiv, a powerful magician who advises the king on strategies – but, his fans will not be surprised to find that he has a sinister side. On the other hand, Ben Schnetzer is Khadgar, a young human with magic powers, a pleasant apprentice kind of personality, who will be the ally of Lothar. And into the mix comes Garona, Paula Patton, part human, part Orc.

In many ways this is comic book and Saturday matinee kind of action and dialogue, with mixture of English and American accents. Some of the battles are huge, CGI thousands, while some of the confrontations between Orcs and humans are in bone-crunching close-up.

It is all a bit bombastic, but that is part of the point – and, it seems, fans have not been disappointed so we can look forward to the next instalment, with Lothar as leader, Khadgar as advisor, and conflict between humans and Orcs into which Garona has been placed in an invidious position.

Nothing to do with content of the film but it is a pity that the father of director, Duncan Jones (Moon, Source Code) died a few months before the release of the film – his father was David Bowie.

1. Audience knowledge of Warcraft? The games, television programs, over the decades? The fans? Expectations of this film?

2. The film presupposing audience familiarity? Not? Introducing the audience into the Warcraft world?

3. The title, expectations, the focus on battles, realism? Invitation to go into the world of fantasy?

4. The variety of ingredients, popular aspects of so many fantasy stories, The Lord of The Rings, Avatar, Star Wars, Star Trek, Mad Max Fury Road, Conan the Barbarian, and
the references to the book of Exodus and Moses?

5. The cast, apt embodying of the characters? The humans, the Orcs?

6. The visuals of, the land of the Orcs, arid, battleground, going through the portal, lush world? The human kingdom, the cities, exteriors, the palace and the interiors, the mediaeval style? The home of the Guardian, the tower, the interiors, the pool, the library? Costumes and decor? The musical score?

7. The creation of the creatures, the examples of magic, the battles and the vast number of soldiers, the close-ups and detail of the battles and fights?

8. The introduction of the Orcs, their appearance, size, faces, tusks, bodies? The presentation of the hero, his family, his pregnant wife, the birth of the son, the leader and giving the baby energy? The plan for the migration into the human world? Through the portal? The leader and drawing energy from the humans at opening the portal? Going through, tossed in space, the rescue? The leader of the clan, authority, power, the community? The taking of human energy, wanting to overcome the human kingdom?

9. The contrast with the kingdom, the palace, the King and his court, the courtiers, the king and his wife, children? The human prisoners of the Orcs, the dangers to the kingdom?

10. Lothar, his policing the kingdom, his leadership, dead wife at birth, his son, the warrior?

11. The arrival of Khadgar, his age, experience, fleeing the other community, his knowledge, his capacity for magic? At the mercy of the kingdom? Received with suspicion? His justifying himself? His later return to his origins and asking for help?

12. The crisis, the need to seek the Guardian, Lothar and Khadgar travelling, the creatures, flying through the sky?

13. The Guardian, Mdhiv, his talent, his assistant, his magical powers, to protect the kingdom, absent for six years? Seeming benign – but suspicions? Lothar, the discussions, Khadgar, the library, encountering the Guardian, hiding the book? The decision to go to the kingdom?

14. Guardian, the encounter with the King, discussions, advice? The Guardian and his interior life? The decision to fight the Orcs? The battle, the Orcs travelling on the giant wolves? The encounter with Garona? Her appearance, being taken, in the court, in prison, the Queen bringing her food and a blanket?

15. Durotan with his family, his leadership, to becoming suspicious of the leader, the issue of loyalty, his friend, at home, the plans, asking for the meeting with the King?

16. The Orc leader, his role, sinister, powers, the fact that he had opened the portal, allowing in the Orcs?

17. The meeting, the agreement, each returning home, the attack of the Orcs? Lothar and his son doing battle? The Guardian, watching from the mountain top, setting up the barriers evil magic? The son and his death?

18. Lothar, the return, the dilemma for the King? Lothar and Khadgar going to visit the Guardian? In his talent, his being weak, getting energy from his assistant and killing him? The Guardian and the encounter with Garona?

19. The King, the decision, the advice of the Guardian? The whole company going? Lothar in the cell?

20. The battle, the massed Orcs, the portal, the leader and his wanting to return to fight, Durotan as hero, killing his opponent, the leader and his vengeance, killing Durotan? His wife’s death? The traditions of the Orcs?

21. The ferocious battle, the humans losing, yet wanting to free the humans? The king and his asking Garona to kill him, the knife given by the Queen? Reluctance, doing so?

22. The Guardian, getting weaker, confronted by Lothar, Khadgar? His burning Lhadgars drawings? The confrontation, his going into the pool, his final words, his death? The
closing of the portal?

23. The saving of the humans? Lothar and his travelling, his dismay at the King’s death, condemnation of Garona? His being acclaimed as leader?

24. Garona, the leadership of the Orcs?

25. Durotan’s wife, taking the baby, putting in them the screen, the echoes of Moses and the Exodus, the baby’s survival – and the final image of the child?

26. The preparation for the next chapter?

THE GRUDGE 2

US, 2006, 12 minutes, Colour.
Amber Tamblyn, Jennifer Beals, Edison Chen, Arielle Kebbel, Teresa Palmer, Sarah Michelle Geller.
Directed by Takashi Shimizu.

When you’re on a good thing, stick to it… This must be the philosophy driving Japanese director Takashi Shimizu. Grudge 2 is the sixth reworking of his basic story. He did a short version and a video version in Japan, then a screen version at home and a remake in the US, then a sequel in Japan and now the US version of the sequel. And there are plenty of openings for more!

Actually, this is not really a remake of Ju-on 2 but a newly written screenplay by Stephen Susco who adapted the first film as well. There are some elements from the Japanese film, especially with a group of schoolgirls who visit the haunted house but the rest is quite different, especially as the vengeful ghosts (their story is always the same) migrate to Chicago and go to work haunting, terrifying and killing there.

This film takes up where The Grudge finished, with Sarah Michelle Geller in hospital after she tried to burn down the ill-fated house. Her sister, Amber Tamblyn, is sent by their mother to Japan to find out what happened. In the meantime, a student at the international school, has been spooked and returns home to the US, ghosts following.

So, there is the double plot of what is happening in Japan, including an interesting visit to the ghost’s mother which fills in some background of why all is so evil, and of what is happening in Chicago involving a young boy, his older sister, his father and stepmother (Jennifer Beals).

A difficulty is that the material is so familiar to fans that it runs the risk of not being particularly scaring. However, it is strong on mood and atmosphere.

1. The popularity of Japanese horror films? Possession, menace, destruction? Spirits?

2. The transferring of these stories to the US? Characters, action between Japan and the US? Japanese ghosts, American victims? The director and his making an American version of this film?

3. Audience presuppositions about the plot of the original? Karen, in Japan, the experience of the house, the ghosts, her trying to burn the house down?

4. Karen’s story continued, in hospital, pursued by the ghosts, to the rooftop, her death?

5. Mrs Davis, concerned about her daughter, sending Aubrey? Aubrey, as a sister, young American woman, going to Japan? Karen’s death? Going to the house, experiencing the same hauntings? The death?

6. The explanation of the ghost, the wife, the murder of the husband, the son? Vindictive? Appearances? The mother of the wife, her warnings, her death?

7. Allison’s story, studying in Japan, with her three friends? Mrs Dale and studies? The episode happening some years later, going to the house, experiencing the ghosts, the death of her friends, consulting Mrs Dale? Mrs Dale herself being a ghost? A return to the United States?

8. Chicago, Trish, the family, Jake, a new husband? The new house, mysterious happenings next door? The presence of the ghosts, Trish being possessed, bludgeoning her husband? Allison and her appearance?

9. The way of storytelling, not linear, the three different stories and the interconnection?