VAN WILDER: PARTY LIAISON

2002, 92 minutes, Colour.
Ryan Reynolds, Tara Reid, Kal Penn, Tim Matheson.
Directed by Walt Becker.


I was going to write a review of this film when I received the review from Cinema, the organisation for classifications of the Office for Women of the Bishops Conference of the Philippines. I thought they summed it up perfectly:

Van Wilder: Party Liaison is yet another teen movie done in the tradition of American Pie with a dash of Dumb and Dumber look. The film features a number of physical gags that seems to be the standard "gross scenes" of contemporary teen movies (e.g. the dog semen stuffed in éclairs). But this type of comedy approach is starting to be more annoying than funny; in fact, the audience apparently gets tired of this toilet humors. The movie as a whole has nothing new to offer (it only maintains some popular myths like a bad boy changing his ways as he meets the girl of his dreams) and it lacks substance as it fails in so many ways on the technical side.

If action and crime movies are accused of glorifying criminals, Van Wilder: Party Liaison is no different as it glorifies an easy-go-lucky and bum character. Notwithstanding the offensive scenes that insult the viewing public's sensitivities, Van Wilder's personification of a cool contemporary student will not inspire today's youth to value education and the importance of learning. Students who would see this film may think that Van's indecent and carefree behavior is acceptable as long as you can get away with it, and that the most important thing in life is partying and having fun.

Although it may be true that life to be fully lived should not be taken too seriously, this should not be an excuse to waste it irresponsibly. At the end of it all, humans are created to be stewards of life to take care of it, not as "party liaisons" to put it to waste. ( CINEMA. Date reviewed: September 20, 2002)

NOW YOU SEE ME 2

US, 2016, 129 minutes, Colour.
Jesse Eisenberg, Mark Ruffalo, Woody Harrelson, Dave Franco, Lizzie Kaplan, Daniel Radcliffe, Michael Caine, Morgan Freeman, Saana Lathan.
Directed by Jon M. Chu.

First, a friendly piece of initial advice: in order to appreciate who’s who, what’s what, why’s why, it might be best to see the first film again or at least read a synopsis. You may well be wondering as the film goes on just why various situations are occurring and where people stand.

The old team is back again with the addition of Lizzie Kaplan (instead of Isla Fisher), no blushing violet, joining Jesse Eisenberg, Dave Franco, Woody Harrelson as The Horseman, the team of famous magicians from the first film, along with Mark Ruffalo as the FBI connection.

If you want to see some magic and sleight of hand, then there are quite some stunts in this film, especially concerning the robbery of a chip from a giant computer and the skills in which each of The Horsemen conceal the card from security and forget from one to the other. And there is a big, big climax set in London on New Year’s Eve, some street smarts as well as a dramatic combination which has us asking how could this possibly be – but, as in the first film, as well as early in the film, some rational explanations are given.

The Horseman have been out of action for some time but make a stand at the New York promotion event, but then disappear down a chute – to Macau! Though the first part of the film takes place in rather exotic settings, hotels, casinos, local markets, and the site of the giant computer in Macau, for various reasons which emerge during the film and relate to Daniel Radcliffe as a complacently sinister little villain and to Michael Caine, everybody goes to London for the finale. And that includes the FBI agents who are still in pursuit.

If you like the cast, you will be very pleased, Michael Caine being coldly arrogant this time, Morgan Freeman becoming more and more benign as the film goes on and, for the price of one ticket, we get to Woody Harrelson’s, a twin brother, with an abundant wig, with a manic smile and villainy.

While there was plenty of novelty and surprise in the initial film, the sequel still has all the ingredients for a friendly audience to enjoy itself.

1. An entertainment with magic, illusions, and the story of the illusionists?

2. The first film, the introduction of The Horsemen, their characters, their skills, exercise? Dylan and his role? The FBI? Crimes, vengeance, prison?

3. New York City, the FBI offices, city locations, the big show? The transition to Macao, the shop, the markets, hotels, the science plant? The transition to London, New Years Eve? The city lit? The Thames? Light in the darkness? The musical score?

4. The gathering of the group, the introduction of Lula, strong personality, her skills, exercising them? Jack and the scenes with flicking the cards? Mc Kinney, not good at cards, his skill in hypnosis? Lula and her past, the hats and rabbits? Her ambitions? Atlas, in the subterranean room, hearing the voice? The mystery of The Eye?

5. Focus on Dylan, 1984, his father as an escape artist, with Bradley, the watch for his son, his son waiting, his death? The blame? Bradley in prison? The switching of the plot to more sympathy for him?

6. The gathering, the performance, Owen, his ego, hypnotising, giving him his speech at the show? The crowds applauding? The power going off, the, the escape of The Horseman, escaping down the chute? Arriving in Macao?

7. The shop, magic, the proprietor, her son? The visits? The gear, illusions, Dylan’s father’s safe? Bradley, his disappearing? Dylan put in the safe, into the water, the watch, finding the switch, rescued by Atlas?

8. Walter, his gathering The Horseman? His explanation of the illusion and their arriving in Macao, drugged, transported? His being the son of Arthur Tressler? His arrogance, the task, getting the chip, his motivations, power and money?

9. Gathering at the site, each with their different function, the site manager, the security checks, Jack and the destruction and his retrieving the chip, the four flicking the chip to one another during the searches? Getting out?

10. The focus on the FBI, the agents, the suspicions of Dylan and his connection with The Horseman? The doors locked and the show? Confronting Dylan, dismissing him? His going to Macao?

11. Dylan, visiting Bradley in prison, his comforts, the escape together, going to Macao? The sleight of hand, the motivations? His presence in the shop, the safe, his disappearing act?

12. Tressler, his wealth, the insurance issue about Dylan’s father, the losses, prison, his son, the plan?

13. Mc Kinney, his twin, manic laughter, his role with the billionaires? The stories of past rivalry and their growing up? His role in the finale, hypnotised?

14. In the shop, the fight, Dylan, the chip, slipping it to Atlas and pushing in out the door?

15. Everybody in London, the plan? Walter and Tressler, Bradley, the FBI?

16. New Years Eve, the lights, the distractions in the street, Jack and the cards and the tricks, Lula and the birds, Mc Kinney and his brother, Atlas and the encounter with twin? Executing the plan?

17. The group being captured, put on the plane, the confrontation, the issue of the chip, the group being thrown out of the plane, appearing at the windows? Landing on the Thames, the television coverage, the expose of the villains, the explanation of the illusions? The crowds cheering?

18. Bradley, the true story of his relationship with Dylan’s father, their being friends? His sense of responsibility and guilt? Revealing this to Dylan when he was ready?

19. And the audience ready for more Now You See Me?

THE TELEGRAPH TRAIL

US, 1933, 54 minutes, Black and white.
John Wayne, Duke, Frank Mc Hugh, Marceline Day, Otis Harlen, Albert J. Smith, Yakima Cannut.
Directed by Tinny Wright.

The Telegraph Trail is the first of 11 films with John Wayne released during 1933. He was in his mid--20s and was continue to make the short B-budget westerns that he had been making for some years – until his presence in the Oscar-winning John Ford Western, Stagecoach. He was to be a regular in so many of John Ford’s films, especially cavalry films. He was to win an Oscar 36 years later for True Grit and his last film was over 40 years later, The Shootist.

In many ways, it is surprising how much plot and variety of entertainment can be packed into these very brief westerns.

The basic plot concerns the continuing of the Telegraph line across the United States in the 1860s. It is placed in the tradition of the wagons and the Stagecoach and continued communications and the opening up of the West. While townspeople and traders welcomed the Telegraph, some of those who had exclusive rights on trade were against it and teamed up with Indian raiders to attack.

John Wayne belongs to the military and is set to find out who the white man is aiding the Indians. He is accompanied by Frank Mc Hugh, later in so many comedies and Bing Crosby’s priest buddy in Going My Way. His comedy is a bit laboured, more than a touch anti-women, and he shares comic routines with the heroine’s bigoted but cowardly storekeeper uncle.

There is also time for some guitar playing and songs.

The film moves pretty rapidly, the villain encourages an attack on the Telegraph, the heroine has been asked to deliver papers to Wayne and pretends to love him when the villain proposes to her. She keeps writing notes, giving information, saving them from a massacre, and, of course, happy romantic ending.

It is interesting to see the portrayal of the Indians and the traditional cowboys and Indians conflict – but the screenplay has some positives in favour of the Indians and highlighting how they were manipulated by rogue whites. Indian is played by actor and stuntman, Yakima Cannut who was significant for the chariot race in the 1959 Ben Hur.

DEMONIC

US, 2015, 83 minutes, Colour.
Maria Bello, Frank Grillo, Cody Horn, Dustin Milliken, Megan Park, Scott Mechlowicz, Aaron Yoo, Alex Goode.
Directed by Will Cannon.

Demonic is a brief horror film co-produced and presented by director James Wan (Saw, the Insidious films The Conjuring films).

The main focus of the film is on a night in a house abandoned after a massacre in 1988, with a reputation of sinister presence, with a group of young people going to investigate, hold a seance, bring up the spirits. Three of them are killed and the police arrive, the detective in charge played by Frank Grillo and the psychologist played by Maria Bello. A great deal of attention is given to following up clues and drawing on research as well as the interrogation of the main suspect by the psychologist.

The film goes back a week to show how the young group gathered together to go to the house, a young man making documentaries with his cameraman and an expert in rituals joining friends, including the young man whose mother escaped from the 1988 massacre. The documentary maker is egotistical and is suspected of being behind the plan – but there is a final revelation.

Touches of horror, scares, the rituals – and the incorporation of some of the video material in the found footage genre.

1. A brief thriller with demonic overtones, satanic rituals, mass murders? Combined with found footage? Police investigation? Detection and psychological interviews?

2. The background of 1988, the woman accused of the mass murders, the victims, the woman who escaped, the newspaper and media headlines? The house abandoned?

3. The focus on the house, the neighbour investigating noises, finding the dead bodies? The police on the spot, detection, the squad, clues, research, resources? The psychologist?

4. One week earlier, John, his relationship with Michelle, later discovery that she was pregnant? The plan to go to the house? Sam, his enthusiasm? The dislike of Brian? Egotistic? Joined by Jules and her background in these investigations? Donnie as cameraman?

5. Detective Lewis, being called, finding the bodies, finding John, his fright, falling down the stairs, not remembering anything, Lewis ringing Dr Klein, standing her up, her coming for the interviews?

6. The detective, gathering the information, the information about 1988, DNA, blood types? Interactions with John, aggressive? With Dr Klein?

7. Dr Klein, her skills, trying to get information, sympathy for John, her threatening him with life imprisonment? His attack on her?

8. The flashbacks to the group going into the house, sounds, the portraits, different rooms, the ballerina, pointing to the rug, finding the circle? Apprehensive, doors shutting?
The setting up of the cameras, recording the scenes (and the technicians able to download some of the scenes)? The decision to have the seance after Jules was attacked? The effect, the killings, axes? Michelle’s disappearance? Their finding her in the cupboard?

9. Brian, seemingly possessed, the car, his going to the store, protecting the storekeeper? The phone, his bellowing through the phone, the effect on John, his having a seizure? The decision to shoot Brian?

10. Finding Michelle? The revelation that John was behind everything? His mother being the escapee from the house? The effect on him over the years, his keeping it a secret? Brian finding out? Michelle surviving, breaking the spell? The final image and the suggestion of satanic possession of her baby?

11. The theory of the group having to die so that the spirit could become incarnate? The effect on John’s mother? The effect on John, his wanting to kill the group to free his mother?

12. The combination of traditional filming but incorporating scenes of found footage?

MAIGRET: MAIGRET SETS A TRAP

UK, 2016, 87 minutes, Colour.
Rowan Atkinson, Lucy Cohu, Rebecca Night, David Dawson, Fiona Shaw, Shaun Dingwall.
Directed by Ashley Pearce.

The novels of George Simenon have been popular over many decades. And there have been quite a number of film and television versions. This particular story was filmed in 1958 with Jean Gabin as the inspector and directed by the prestigious Jean Delannoy.

For most audiences coming across this BBC production, the surprise will be to find Rowan Atkinson in the title role. How could he make a transition from Black Adder, from Mr Bean, from Johnny English to this most serious performance? But, he does. always serious, rather world-weary, with the compensation of a loving and supportive wife, but fairly inexpressive, especially facially inexpressive for Rowan Atkinson.

This means that the audience can concentrate on the plot, the 1950s Paris settings filmed actually in Budapest, the complications of five women being murdered, the slow investigation, the dissatisfaction of the people, of the media (with photos on the front page of Le Monde which a number of people have noted did not have photos on the front page until 1980!), and of the police chiefs and government ministers.

The screenplay focuses on aspect of the psychology of a serial killer, humiliation and being anti-women, with Maigret setting a trap, taunting the murderer in his vanity and need to make himself known.

In some ways, the identity of the killer is easily revealed by some following up of clues – but there is interest in his interrogations, his relationship with his wife and, especially, with his mother, who is played by Fiona Shaw.

This is the first in a series of Inspector Maigret films made for BBC television.

1. The long popularity of inspector Maigret, Simenon novels, the variety of film versions, television series? 21st-century version?

2. The impact of casting Rowan Atkinson as the inspector? His reputation for comedy? His very serious performance as the inspector?

3. The Paris settings, the 1950s? Costumes, men with coats and hats? Decor, smoking, the city, the landmarks, police precincts, affluent homes, poor neighbourhoods, Montmartre? The musical score?

4. The inspector, introverted, the touch of the recluse, his relationship with his wife, the scenes at home, confiding in her? Her support? The case, the many murders, his office, the photos on the wall? His not making progress? His superiors, the minister and his criticism? The loyal associates? His methods, thinking through the mentality of the killer?

5. The murders, the wife at home, going to the shop, husband and children, her being killed? The family grief? The inspector going to see them?

6. The police, the various visits, the nightclub, the girls wanting protection? The comments about Jack the Ripper and the differences?

7. The party, the experts speaking, mental condition, references to Freud? A man in his 30s, humiliated? Attack on women?

8. The inspector, his ploy, the false arrest, the media pack and their questions, theories? Waiting for the media to respond? The plan, the women officers and their going out to
walk the streets, the plainclothes police? The attack, the policewoman and her fighting back, rescued, the report?

9. Having the coat cloth, the button, the visits to the tailor, the address of the customer, going to his apartment, his wife, his being an artist, alibi, his receiving the inspector, taken to the precinct, in the cell, interrogation? The inspector sure that he was correct? The story of the suit given away, the police finding it, the expertise on when the burn was made?

10. The inspector and his visit to the accused’s mother, a dominant woman, her abrupt behaviour, coming to see her son, his reaction to her? The back story, his father, marrying at 18, having to live with his mother, getting away from her? His wife and his mother spoiling him?

11. The next murder, differences in method, the finding of his knives?

12. The authorities, replacing the inspector? The final interrogation, bringing the wife and the mother? Audiences assuming that the mother did it to cover the son? The protestations that she would do anything for her son? The irony that it was the wife who did the murder?

13. A rather quiet film about police methods, investigations, crime and solutions?

HENRY & JUNE

US, 1990, 136 minutes, Colour.
Fred Ward, Emma Thurman, Maria De Medeiros, Richard E. Grant, Kevin Spacey.
Directed by Philip Kaufmann.

Based on the diaries of writer, Anais Nin and her relationships, literary, sexual, with novelist Henry Miller and his wife, June, in early 1930s in Paris, this film is a dramatisation of the period and its quest for freedom, liberation, sexual experimentation, hedonism, fidelity and infidelity, morality and amorality.

The film is often explicit, making it puzzling and offputting for the ordinary audience. Literature and history students will be able to put it into context, but may find it laborious and, sometimes, tedious as well as intentionally or unintentionally ludicrous – moral and amoral quests.

1. Audience interest in and knowledge of Henry Miller? The reputation of Henry Miller and his book, Tropic of Cancer? This film as informative, biographical, portrait, raising issues and sexuality?

2. Paris in the 1930s, costumes and decor, the city, the landmarks, homes, business world, social world, sex, arts, publishing, brothels? Atmosphere and musical score?

3. The film based on Anais Nin’s diaries, life, her career in writing, the sexual awakening, explorations of sexuality? Relationships?

4. Her portrait, her background, Europe, the US, marrying Hugo, his business associations? Going to Paris? Her life in Paris, marriage, love for Hugo, the bonds, their sex life? Her curiosity? Introducing the visuals of art, films of the period?

5. The use of the movies, Bunuel, avant-garde, sex movies, pornography?

6. Henry Miller entering her life, his friendship with Hugo, his associates in Paris, the American, looking shabby, his appearance, hat, clothes? His work as a writer? Interest in sexuality? The marriage to June, the influence? The process of writing Tropic of Cancer, first anonymous, moving to publication – and its being banned? An American in Paris, the meetings with Anais? June’s arrival, the influence on him? Sexuality, her cultivating Henry as a writer? The background in America, Pop, finance, the sexual exhibitionism with him? Henry seeing this? June and her partner in New York, her departure? June and her life in Paris?

7. An alias and her writing, the study of DH Lawrence, the conversations about Lawrence, six, that being explicit, sensual, brutish? Issues of pictures, language? Henry Miller of the brothels, and their centre curiosity, the modem and the brothel, sexual combinations, choosing prostitutes for observing sexual performance? The effect on an ACE?

8. Hugo, his business world, love for his wife, rather carefree, social involvement, not suspicious of her? The quiet of their domestic scenes?

9. June, her life in America, her attitudes, the partner living in the apartment? The attraction to and these? Together, the sexual attraction, experiences? June and a need for money, and a spraying, the ticket back to New York?

10. Anais and Henry Miller, together, the beginning of the affair, the impact on each of them, secrecy, sexual exploration, mutual dependence? June and her return, ASnais’ bond with June? Anais her cousin, the past relationship, his devotion to her? Her saying he was her lover?

11. June, her reaction, learning of the affair, her being hurt, wanting the contract with the publisher, concern about money, her anger, throwing the manuscript in the air?

12. The issue of publication, Anais supportive, the editor, the social meeting?

13. The background Paris, social life, the variety of characters?

14. The end of the affair? The final credits, information about the continued friendship between Anais and Henry? June as a social worker in New York City?

15. The subsequent reputation of Henry Miller?

MUPPET CHRISTMAS CAROL

US/UK, 1991, 83 minutes, Colour.
Michael Caine, Stephen Mackintosh.
Voices: Dave Goelz, Steve Whitmire, Jerry Nelson, Frank Oz, David Redmond, Don Austen, Jessica Fox, Robert Tygner.
Directed by Brian Henson.

Young audiences will enjoy the Muppets – and adults who remember them from the past. They had secured their place in the hearts of those who first watched them in the 1970s and those who have watched them in their constant reruns.

In the late 1970s and early 1980s, they made their movie debut with The Muppets Movie and The Muppets Take Manhattan. Now they are back and as lively as ever. The sad aspect of the film is that their creator, Jim Henson, died but his Creatures Studio lives and this film is directed by his son.

Gonzo appears as Charles Dickens (aided by Rizzo the Rat as himself) to guide us through the Muppets 19th-century London and into Dickens’ very popular moral fable.

Michael Caine is Scrooge (finally bursting into song), but his performance is matched by Kermit as Bob Cratchit and (to prove parts can be written to fit the stars!), Miss Piggy is Mrs Cratchit. There are cameo appearances by Fozzy Bear and Sam the Eagle (as a schoolmaster) and even Animal gets into the act.

Paul Williams has composed some songs that fit the mood of this very entertaining interpretation of the Dickens’ classic.

1. The popularity of the Muppets? The late 1970s, 1980s? The revival? Their television presence? The style of comedy, singing, interaction with celebrities? Their movies?

2. Audience enjoying the presence of Kermit, Miss Piggy, Gonzo, Fozzy, Ralph, the two cranky old men, the Eagle, Bunsen, the band, the fruit and vegetables alive? Puppets, in action, developing characters, their voices?

3. The adaptation of Charles Dickens? Audience familiarity with the plot? It serving as an introduction to younger audiences? The introduction to the characters, especially Scrooge?

4. Gonzo as narrator, the explanations about Dickens, 19th-century London, his novels? Gonzo and his following Scrooge and the other characters? Rizzo the rat and his comic commentaries? The comedy, pratfalls, falling from windows…?

5. The range of songs, illustrating characters, situations, the spirit of Christmas? Jaunty and jovial?

6. Introduction to Scrooge, Michael Caine’s presence? Audiences familiar with his character? The song describing him, everybody singing it, the camera following him to his office? In his office, Cratchit and his continued work, the range of the accountants? Scrooge and his meanness, saying Humbug?

7. Fred, the visit, cheerful, interactions with Bob? The arrival of those asking for the donation, his charity? Their fear of Scrooge – and the beggar at the door and Scrooge throwing the wreath at him?

8. Scrooge, unhappy, working, the issue of Christmas day off for Bob and the accountants, his finally agreeing?

9. Scrooge at home, his supper, going to the house, the Marley brothers and the threat of the doorknob? The history of his partnership with them?

10. The ghost of Christmas Past, the young girl, flying through the air, Gonzo and Rizzo holding on? Scrooge as a child, very serious, his choices? Older, business, his love for Belle, his putting off the marriage date, losing her, Scrooge and his sadness?

11. The ghost of Christmas Present, being jovial, in the streets, people happy, Fred and Clara and their game and Scrooge wondering whom they were describing? Their laughing at him? Going to the Cratchit household, seeing Tiny Tim, the effect?

12. The Cratchit household, Miss Piggy as the mother, the pig daughters, the frog sons? Dad, beloved, coming home, Christmas meal, Emily Cratchit and her antagonism towards Scrooge? Bob and his proposing the toast to Scrooge?

13. The ghost of Christmas Future, Death, the Grim Reaper? Going through the town, the people commenting on the dead person, their comments about Scrooge and his meanness? Going to the Cratchit household? Tiny Tim and his death, sadness?

14. Scrooge waking, changing, a generous donation and the shock of the collectors, the beggar and his being commissioned to buy the turkey and getting the tip, Scrooge on the street, the song of the spirit of Christmas, going to the Cratchit household with the turkey, Emily and her negative reaction, his offering a raise, the crowd going into the meal,
Tim – and God bless everyone? Fred and Clara at the party?

15. An entertainment with the Muppets – and an entertaining interpretation of Dickens?

UNIVERSAL SOLDIER: THE RETURN

US, 1999, 83 minutes, Colour.
Jean- Claude Van Damme, Michael Jai White, Heidi Schanz, Xander Berkely, Daniel von Bargen, Bill Goldberg.
Directed by Mic Rodgers.

Action star, Dolph Lundgren, initiated a series of Universal Soldier action shows in the early 1990s. The basis of the plot was that American technology and arms companies could resurrect soldiers killed in the Vietnam war and in other fields of combat, easily able to recuperate after being wounded, and becoming Unisols, Universal Soldiers. The main candidate was Luke Devereux, played by action star Jean- Claude Van Damme.

This film is the first of the sequels, featuring Luke Devereux, his wife dead, caring for his young daughter, involved in the company that was experimenting with the Universal Soldiers, a program run by Xander Berkely.

The opening sequence has a long tour of the plant, preparing audiences for the plot and launching into a speed boat and military chase, all observed by a computer, played realistically but, in fact, a simulated exercise. One of the main characters, a Universal Soldier who is continually resuscitated, Romeo, is played by wrestler Bill Goldberg.

One of the central characters is, in fact, the highly intelligent computer, named Seth, who instructs Luke’s daughter but who overhears, lipreading, discussions with the head of the project and the general from the Pentagon, Daniel von Bargen, talking about termination of the project. The computer not only reacts, but is violently aggressive, programming the Universal Soldiers to destruction of military and civilians. Devereux has to work out how to close down the computer, tracking down a dirty nerd mad scientist, a visit to a strip club, eventually getting the information to destroy Seth.

Seth is very smart, chooses a hulking body on the advice of the nerd so that Seth can confront everyone, including Devereux. There is a complication when Devereux’s daughter is in hospital and there is split-second timing for her to be healed and extricated.

A pushy reporter is in the facility filming when all this happens. Her cameraman is killed, she stays with Devereux, saving him at times, sharing the dangers.

Ultimately, there is a confrontation between Devereux and Seth, helped by a fellow worker Kelly who seemed to have been turned by Seth but shoots him. The project is exploded.

In many ways, the screenplay has its cake while eating it – a very full-on macho action adventure and various lines of dialogue criticising this kind of research and its dangers.

ANTWONE FISHER

US, 2002, 120 minutes, Colour.
Derek Luke, Denzel Washington, Joy Bryant.
Directed by Denzel Washington.


It is difficult to dramatise goodness. Far easier to deal with conflict and evil - and more absorbing for audiences.

This is very much the case with Antwone Fisher, only a moderate success at the American box-office and looked at with something of disdain by non-Americans who dismissed it as being too 'worthy' or that the ending was too clean-cut for an otherwise stately and thought-provoking movie. Yet, Antwone Fisher survived his past, wrote this screenplay as well as a fuller memoir after the filming. And, perhaps, the ending is not quite as clean as all that because Antwone, while he finds his mother, does not relate lovingly to her and there is no indication that he will return to see her, no matter how much the audience wants this to happen.

Derek Luke was working at the Sony studio's gift shop and by chance met Antwone Fisher. He went for the part, his first, and acquits himself admirably. On screen for virtually the whole film, he takes the audience through the difficulties of his life in the navy, his reluctance to undergo the obligatory psychological sessions, his gradual change, his hesitance in committing himself to a relationship. We share his discovering love. We share the tragedy of his birth, abuse by carers, the death of his best friend. We finally share his discovery of mother and family. It is interesting to see Viola Davis early in her career has Antwone’s mother.

Denzel Washington makes his directorial debut and has a substantial role as the navy psychiatrist. The screenplay gives some substance to Dr Davenport's story outside his office, tensions as he and his wife are unable to have children, his personal edginess, his seeing Antwone as a surrogate son, his own healing by the trust Antwone places in him.

Not exciting or action-packed but a fine portrait of a man and his healing of memories.

1. Based on a true story? The central character writing the screenplay? An authentic feel?

2. American cities, Navy bases, psychiatrist rooms, homes? City of Cleveland, the suburbs? Authentic feel? The musical score?

3. Antwone Fisher and his life, his mother pregnant, giving birth in the prison, his father killed by vengeful girlfriend, his being an orphan, in the orphanage? Mrs Tate as foster mother? The husband, the revival preaching, the singing in church? The other boys in the house, black, mixed race, being whipped by Mrs Tate, humiliated, her racist language? The girl in the house, the sexual abuse of Antwone and its effect on him? His brothers, their lives later? Jesse as his best friend, confiding in him? Antwone spending his childhood and adolescence in this household? The effect?

4. His joining the Navy, the training, learning Japanese, world travel? The significance of his anger, the taunts of the fellow sailors? His attacks, fights? Charges, demotion?

5. His being sent to Jerome Davenport, to deal with his anger, his silence in the room, not answering questions? The demands that he attend, to have three sessions? The encounters with Cheryl outside, shyness, her friendship? His eventually beginning to talk, difficulty with questions, getting Davenport to ask? The cumulative effect of their talking? The flashbacks visualising his past?

6. His self-awareness, the angers because of so many losses in his life? The Jesse story, Antwone being down and out, going to see Jesse, welcomed, going to the store, the robbery, Jesse being shot? Antwone feeling that significant people had abandoned him? His feeling that Davenport would leave him?

7. The character Davenport, Navy psychologist, his easy manner, his quick wits in asking the right questions, seeming casual, drawing out responses? Yet the formality at home, the tensions with his wife, his explanation of their not being able to have children, the effect on each of them? The silences at home? Antwone, coming to visit Davenport, early, meeting his wife, the glass of cider? Davenport’s reaction? Calling him back, the invitation to Thanksgiving dinner? The formality of his dress, introduction to the family, the older generation? Enjoying the meal, the old man and his questions? Antwone upset, leaving the room? Talk with Davenport – offering him the problem that himself and his sense of abandonment?

8. Davenport encouraging him to go out with Cheryl, her personality, her job, the Navy family? Going out for a drink, talking, having something to eat? Antwone happy, Cheryl giving him a peck on the cheek? Telling Davenport?

9. Their going to his graduation, Davenport telling him that that was the end of the sessions? Antwone upset?

10. Davenport urging him to find his family, to resolve his sense of loss and his angers? Talk with Cheryl, the decision, inviting her to go to Cleveland with him? Love, the sexual encounter and its effect on him? Getting the file, the sympathetic official, the phone book, all the calls to the family? Knowing the name of his father?

11. Finding the family, the joy, taking him to visit his mother, her apartment in the projects, listening, his speech, his kissing her, forgiveness, and not responding – but her tears when he left? His being welcomed into the large family and discovering cousins and relatives?

12. Going back to Davenport, expressing his appreciation, Davenport telling him about his relationship with his wife, thanking him for his help? The father-son relationship?

13. A film of warmth and humanity? A film about adoption and its consequences? Fostering? The possibilities of discovering birth families?

THE CONJURING 2

US, 2016, 134 minutes, Colour.
Patrick Wilson, Vera Farmiga, Frances O' Connor, Madison Wolfe, Simon Mc Burney, Maria Doyle Kennedy, Simon Delaney, Franka Potente.
Directed by James Wan.

The first Conjuring film was a box office success, audiences very interested in the demonic themes and the confrontation of Ed and Lorraine Warren against the Demons. The screenplay was based on actual characters and events, especially with the impact of the Amityville possession in 1976, the role of the Warrens and the subsequent books, feature films and sequels. The Warrens had plenty of stories, and had become media celebrities, a sequel was inevitable. It is, however, a sequel which has received critical praise and box office success.

Ed and Lorraine Warren, played again by Patrick Wilson and Vera Farniga, conducted sessions in a variety of houses over several decades. While they were a couple who had heightened sensitivities and sensibility towards the demonic, they were also officially connected with the Catholic church. They did many of their investigations on behalf of the church, something which is taken up in this film, a priest visiting them and urging them to go to England where there were reports of strange happenings in the outer London area of Enfield.

The film actually opens with some sessions about Amityville. During the sitting, Lorraine has out-of-body experiences, accompanying the killer to the various rooms, her arms doing the shot gun movements, a single lineup of victims, and the sense of the demonic presence. This continues later, after she has seen her husband painting a portrait of a horrific nun, a vision she had seen, and has a further confrontation with the nun and a premonition of Ed’s death. She asks husband not to do any more consultations.

The priest is persuasive and they go to London, meeting the Hodgson family. Peggy Hodgson (Frances O’ Connor) has four children, has been abandoned by her husband, has little money. Suddenly, one of her daughters, Janet (Madison Wolfe) starts to experience what seem to be poltergeist happenings. But, at times she is possessed by a sinister presence, seemingly an old man who had died in an armchair in the downstairs room. When the happenings increase, the police are called, the children have to move in with neighbours, the media become interested as does the psychic who believes in the hauntings, Simon Mc Burney, and an expert who is very sceptical, Franco Potente.

The Warrens are present only for a few days, they share experiences with the family, Lorraine empathising with Janet, Ed getting the trust of the family, even to doing some repair jobs in the house. The film builds up to climactic sequences, the testing of Janet’s voice to see whether she is telling the truth, a surveillance video adding to the scepticism, and the Warrens reluctantly leaving.

However, there is a dramatic development, needless to say, and they return for a final confrontation, Ed in danger of fulfilling his wife’s premonition of death, Lorraine having the name of the Demon and confronting it.

Ever since The Exorcist, that has been a continuous interest in demonic presence and confrontations and exorcism. This film, persuasively acted, with an authentic feel of London in the rain, is a credible addition to the genre – even if many will be sceptical about the credibility of the claims of true stories. (Lorraine Warren and one of the children, Billy Hodgson, acted as technical advisors to the film.)

Director James Wan has quite a list of horror thrillers including Saw, the two Insidious films and now the two Conjuring films.

1. The impact of the original film? A successful sequel? Developing themes and characters?

2. Based on a true story, the records, the photos and tapes in the final credits? How credible the events?

3. Ed and Lorraine Warren, in the first film, establishing their credentials? Their role, Demon hunters, their connection with the Catholic Church, their sensitivities to the demonic? Their role in Amityville? Interviewed on television, radio, sceptics against them?

4. The introduction, the Amityville situation? The setting, the group gathered, Lorraine’s experience, reliving the killings, seeing them, her arm actions with the gun? The lineup of the victims? Her fears? The presence of the Demon? Her later experience at home, with her daughter, the noise in the corridor, seeing the nun, Ed and his painting of the nun, the confrontation, a premonition of Ed’s death with the broken branch? The panic in writing the Demon’s name in the Bible? Ed and her asking him to stop for the time being? The characters of the couple, their trust, love, marriage?

5. The Enfield hauntings and the documentation? UK, London, the ordinary suburbs and streets, ordinary people? The Hodgson household, the absent father and his twins with the other woman, his taking all the records? Four children, Peggy looking after them, harassed, no money? At school, Janet caught smoking with her friend, the principal’s complaint, her mother not believing her? Bill, his stammer, his being bullied at school? The children at home?

6. The film’s gradual buildup, steady intimations of horror, demonic presence? Janet, her experiences, the presence of the old man, his name, explanation of his story, his malevolence? Janet and Margaret sharing the room, the sinister experiences, noises? Johnny, the tent, the truck moving on its own? Sounds and movements, bangings? The effect on the children, on Peggy? Going to the neighbours, Vic and his wife, their kindness, taking the family in? Witness to what was happening? The police arriving, initially wary, their experiences?

7. Peggy, as a character in herself, having to cope, relying on the neighbours, looking after her children? The police arriving, the questions? The media?

8. The media host, the interrogation in the home, Anita Gregory and her scepticism, Maurice and his concern, the death of his daughter, his afterlife hopes? Gathering, the televising of the session, the interrogation of the spirits, reactions? The issue of whether all this was a hoax? Peggy taking advantage of improved accommodation applications?

9. The priest, visiting the Warrens, their commission, the role of the church, investigations, caution about hoaxes?

10. The Warrens agreeing to go to London, meeting Peggy and the family, staying in the house, the room? Lorraine with Janet, the talk on the swing, Lorraine telling stories, Janet responding? Ed, his listening? The visit of Maurice,? Surveillance, Anita Gregory and the video camera, capturing Janet herself smashing the furniture?

11. Ed and the house, fixing things, the experience in the basement?

12. Janet and Peggy alone, in the house, the reuniting with the children? Johnny, his experience, Janet in the cupboard?

13. The cumulative effect, the old man, dying in the chair, his voice, the test with Janet and the water in her mouth, the voices being heard? The Demon? Lorraine and Ed having to leave? Peggy and her dismay?

14. The atmosphere in winter, the rain, Christmas – and Ed singing Elvis’s song?

15. Ed and Lorraine leaving, the sense of dread, in the train, listening to the tapes, combining the tapes, the old man saying he was prevented from leaving, the Demon? Lorraine realising that to name the Demon was to have power over it?

16. The return, being locked out of the house, into getting the basement, coming up through the floor? Lorraine, getting the Bible, finding the name of the Demon? Getting in, the difficulties in the way, the water, the steam, going to the upper room, Janet and Ed leaning on the window, Ed holding, the curtain rails, ready to fall, the lightning and the broken branch, Lorraine and her premonition? Lorraine confronting the nun, the Demon, pinned to the wall, saying the name and saving everyone?

17. The Hodgson family together? Ed and Lorraine, the Elvis song, the dancing? The souvenirs in their museum?

18. The final credits, the photos, the recordings?

19. Horror, demonic, eerie, scary – and truthful or not?