NEWS FROM PLANET MARS


France, 2016, 101 minutes, Colour
François Damiens, Vincent Macaigne, Veerie Baetens, Michel Aumont.
Directed by Dominik Moll.

News From Planet Mars is a quirky entertainment – French and Belgian style. The film starts evocatively with a space launch and an astronaut floating in space above the city lights. But then he wakes up and it is Philippe, the central character of this film, François Damiens (who played, convincingly, the hearing-impaired father in The Belier Family).

Philippe is the computer expert, reliable and thorough at work, and asked to supervise a rather manic genius, Jerome, played with absolutely irritating conviction by Vincent Macaigne. Not that Philippe does not have other problems. He is separated from his wife, a television correspondent for political European Union conferences. She suddenly lands her children on Philippe. The son is very slow at school and becoming a campaigning vegan, and the daughter is absolutely obsessed with studies, some of which are done with her boyfriend.

We get a glimpse of a nice Philippe’s walking out one night and he accosts a salad man with his dog who will not scoop up his dog poop from the footpath. Philippe encounter him again later when walking his sister’s poodle and has an alternate solution to the scoop!

Philippe’s surname is Mars and the planets do not seem to be an alignment.

Jerome has a crisis in the office and brandishes his hatchet that he carries for crises, throwing it across the room and actually cutting off Philippe’s year. So far, so bad. It can only get worse – and does.

Jerome gets out of a mental institution and turns up outside Philippe’s window asking to come in – and, while claims he will leave, of course, he does not, imposing himself in the house, having class discussions with the son and endorsing his vegan approach, getting the daughter to collaborate (with cash) when he brings his girlfriend from the institution, Chloe, and puts pressure on Philippe to enable her to stay the night. As might be imagined, a lot of potential comedy which is followed through.

Chloe is a protester, especially against the artificial cultivation of animals and their slaughter – which leads to an attempt on a farm, with explosives, Jerome and Chloe driven by another eccentric character in the apartment block, a former chauffeur to French President Giscard De’staing. Philippe and the children save the day. Not entirely.

Part of the nice fantasy is that Philippe’s parents, elderly then deceased, keep appearing to Philippe, giving advice – with the touch of the guardian angel, something which is useful at the end.

Philippe is likeable, Jerome too in his way, and there are lots, of quirkily humorous touches – especially when the son urges his mother to say cucumber in one of her television reports, even Philippe willing her to say cucumber at the end.

1. A quirky film? French and Belgian collaboration and humour?

2. The French cities, apartments and apartment blocks, streets, offices, hospital? The countryside on the road to Sedan? The musical score?

3. The title, application of extraterrestrial activity? The touch of the surreal? The introduction to the film, the documentary newsreel, astronauts, the spacecraft, space, the astronaut floating over the city lights? The recurring image? Philippe as an astronaut? And his own planet, Mars?

4. Philippe as the centre of the film, ordinary man, turning 49, the divorce from Myriam, his relationship with his two children, at work, the boss relying on him, his having to supervise Jerome and cope with his eccentricities? Jerome and his cleaver, letting loose, attacking the boss, smashing everything, hurling the cleaver, cutting off Philippe’’s ear? His wife, delivering the kids as she went off to her television reporter work? His walk, the man with the dog, the discussion about the poop, the argument about doing the right thing? Later seeing the man again? And his sisters dog pooping? Watching his wife on television – and their son asking her to say cucumber? His son, limited intelligence, revising the massacre of St Bartholomew – and thinking professionals instead of Protestants? His not wanting to dissect the frogs, his choice to be vegetarian, resisting the bacon? Sarah, 17, perpetual study, working with Clement? Their father wanting him them to watch the Marx Bros but letting them go? His son’s text from Roxanne, the crudity, aged 12, Philippe ringing the principal, the boss coming in when he was talking to the principal – ambiguity? Roxanne’s father later punching him?

5. Philippe, a nice man, a decent man, easily imposed on, the reappearance of his parents (after the exaggerations in their daughter’s portraits of them, genitals…)? The parents as benign, talking to Philippe, like guardians? The stopping the countdown for the explosion?

6. Jerome, at work, eccentric, wanting children with the television presenter, going berserk? In the street, escaping from the institution, having met Chloe and attracted to her? Philippe letting him up, letting him stay, Jerome not leaving, working on his studies with the son, his speech on Progress – and the speech and the audiovisuals? The issue of the death of the frogs compared to the Holocaust? Stealing all the frogs from school? His cooking with the son for Chloe, the mess in the house? Paying Sarah €100 to say she was vegetarian?

7. Philippe’s sister, her art, the portraits, the opening, the parents and the genitals and Philippe’s comment? changing her name to Xanae? The dog, leaving it with Philippe, his walking it, pooping, his exasperation and throwing it in the river?

8. Chloe, from the institution, not wanting to be touched, the story of her biting the woman wearing the fur, her causes, vegetarian, against the killing of animals? Wanting a shower, Jerome saying she could? His asking Philippe to give up his room? Jerome continually imposing?

9. The tough brothers, delivering the explosives, the plan for sabotage, the son involved, the explosives under the bed? The old man downstairs, friendship with Philippe, chauffeur to Giscard, always talking about him, losing his licence, but taking the saboteurs?

10. Sarah, Clement dropping her, Philippe rescuing her, the verbal attack on the boy’s father? The decision to drive to Sedan, the GPS, catching up?

11. Chloe, change of heart, the kiss, the crash? The countdown for the bomb, Philippe rescuing the frogs? The explosions being fireworks?

12. Philippe saved – and his comment to Chloe about seeing him as a gorilla in a cage, his acknowledgement he needed to be free, giving up his job, uncertain as to the future?

13. Jerome and Chloe, the farewell, going to Belgium? (And Myriam saying cucumber in her television report, Philippe urging her on?)

GOAT

US, 2016, 91 minutes, Colour.
Ben Schnetzer, Nick Jonas, Virginia Gardner, James Franco, Danny Flaherty.
Directed by Andrew Neal.

Goat is a very American film, a film about initiation rituals and hazing at US colleges, a picture of some of the fraternities and their codes, the abuse of newcomers to incorporate them into the spirit of the fraternity and so create a lifelong buddy system. Other countries have their own experiences of hazing – especially initiation into the military.

This film shows some of the rituals quite graphically and physically disturbingly with the screenplay particularly critical of this kind of uber-male mentality.

Ben Schnetzer (The Book Thief, Pride) is Brad, a young man about to enter a college, a minor college, yet one with pride, a college where his older brother, Brett, is a respected senior. Brett is played quite effectively by the singer, Nick Jonas. At the opening of the film, we see some of the raucous behaviour of the students, behaviour which involves drugtaking as well as sexual encounters. Brad backs out of this behaviour and is asked by some young strangers to give them a lift, something he is reluctant to do but technically accepts.

The audience identifies with Brad and his uncertainty, having to drive the two young men further and further, out into the country where he stops. He is brutally assaulted and forced to hand over his ATM number. Bewildered by this experience, he goes home, eventually confiding in Brett and going to the police who do not believe him, thinking he was on some kind of drug deal.

This experience has a profound influence on his entry in college, his decision to participate in the hazing rituals, and his determination not to give up and to persevere – with the presumption that by undergoing these experiences he would become something of a man, a stronger man. At heart, he has been a fairly soft young man, something he has in common with the roommate he finds himself with at college.

When the hazing starts, with the young men being referred to as goats, the senior students almost seem like parodies of military Sergeant Majors, barking out orders, profanities, demanding loyalties, and ordering the initiates to humiliate themselves, wallow in dirt and mud, be deceived by bananas substituting for phalluses, drinking themselves sick… And leaving them huddled together overnight. As he watches, Brett is more and more alienated from the rituals, backing off because of studies.

This makes Brad determined to persevere and proud when he and the group have successfully undergone the humiliations. The crisis emerges when the roommate, a physically and psychological fragile person, collapses athletic training. It means that there have to be enquiries by the Dean of studies, the senior students preparing a cover-up, but the authorities getting to know what actually happened. Was Brad talking as the seniors assumed? Was it Brett?

Afterwards, Brad and Brett go to the police, look at a group of men in a lineup, with Brad unable or unwilling to identify anyone – and then his going to visit the place where the assault happened, and the audience seeing him reflect on the experience as well as the consequences of college and the film leaves the audience to contemplate with him what might happen in his future.

The theme gets an extra emphasis by a cameo from James Franco as a veteran member of the fraternity, full of enthusiastic platitudes, singing the fraternity song with gusto, drinking himself unconscious after having praised the fraternity as a group of civilised gentleman. The critique of the fraternities, the hazing and this kind of supremacist male behaviour and attitudes is very clear.

1. The title, the ritual goat, the theme of the scapegoat? The pledges seen as goats and addressed as goats?

2. The American town, home, bars, the countryside and open road? The campus, the grounds, the rooms and houses? The venues for the hazing, the basements? The musical score – and the touch of the ominous?

3. A film about male behaviour, bonding, fraternities, spirit, fanaticism and pride, self-expression, alcohol, drugs, sex, gratification not relationship, gay and phallic symbols, the hints of bestiality, the Pledges and their initiation by the previous group – and their becoming the next group? The acceptance of this kind of ritual and brotherhood for males?

4. The visualising of the hazing – and the critique? Audience response, interest, disgust?

5. The initial party, the stripper and the lascivious men, the two girls kissing, the drugs? Brad and his leaving, Brett and his staying with the girl? The men asking for a lift, Brad being pleasant, driving a long way, fear, stopping, the ATM number, taking the car, the brutal bashing?

6. Brad, bewildered, walking, home, the injuries to his face, the encounter with Brett? The policeman not believing him, accusing him of the drug deal? His being bashed, issues of his fears, masculinity – and motivation for going to college and for the pledging?

7. Going to college, Brett and his friends, their spirit, brash and bravado?

8. James Franco, his appearance, his speech, enthusiasm, hitting Brad, singing the fraternity song, the over-enthusiasm? His talk about civilised group of gentlemen? Seeing him passed out, drunk?

9. Brad and Will, sharing the room, seemingly weak young men, yet determined to be accepted?

10. The seniors, the fraternity, phi sigma mu, spirit, extreme, the abuse of the young men, the language of fags and bitches, demanding obedience, loyalty, unquestioning? Being called Sir? The forced drinking, the vomiting, stripping, and the mud wrestling, covered in muck, the toilet and the banana, the banana as the phallus, the nights together, drinking from the keg, passing out, ringing the bell, the threat of sex with the goat?

11. The overall effect, seeming ridiculous, serious, psychological and physical damage, the continued determination, the need for acceptance? To be seen as an American male?

12. Brett, his character, opting out, confronting Brad, Brad and his reasons for persevering?

13. Will, quiet man, the exercise, running, collapse and death, the funeral?

14. The men gathering, a cover story? Chance and his leadership? Talking to the dean, seeing Brad outside?

15. Brad, leading the goat into the quadrangle? In his room, the laxatives and the mess?

16. Brad talking with the Dean, not giving away anything, challenging the dean and his knowledge? Brett acknowledging that he spoke the truth? His punching out Chance?

17. Going to the police, the lineup, Brad unable to identify his assailant?

18. Going with Brett to the scene of the bashing – and the final glimpse, his stocktaking?

ALOYS

Switzerland, 2016, 91 minutes, Colour.
Georg Friedrich, Tilde von Overbeck, Karl Friedrich.
Directed by Tobias Nolle.

This is a film from German Switzerland, and the director has stated that people from this part of the country have a sense of isolation in their own country. The central character, Aloys, it is something a symbol of this mentality – although he is played by an Austrian actor (and his father in the film is played by his actual father).

The plot requires a great deal of concentration. Seems straightforward at first,

Aloys is upset at the death of his father, though he later sees him in different circumstances. He is alone, a photographer, with his video footage.

But the main theme of the film is what happens to Aloys in his real life and in his mind, especially concerning a young woman who seems to be a creation of his mind but also exists in real life.

Ultimately, this is a film about loneliness, aloneness, the need for relationship, a film about mental and emotional instability.


1. A film from German Switzerland? Its place in the whole of the Switzerland Federation? Sense of isolation? Language? The French and Italian areas? The choice of an Austrian actor and accent for this film?

2. The city, the funeral parlour, photography, the apartment, the bar and the dance, the cafe, forest, the animals, the hospital? The musical score?

3. Aloys, his age, experience, the death of his father and the effect on him, identifying with his father, detective, photography, film, phone communication? His loneliness and isolation? His look, the red coat?

4. His father, dead, imagining him alive, his reappearances? His father as an aspect of himself?

5. The funeral parlour, the woman claiming acquaintance, his spurning her, yet her photo seen later?

6. The theme of visibility and invisibility? The real and surreal? As a work of the imagination?

7. Vera, in herself, for Aloys, injury, hospital, real, the apartment, phone communication, Aloys’ response?

8. Vera alive, love for him, sharing with him, the vibrant dance, the group and their communication and response, watching the videos?
In the restaurant, in his room, Aloys creating her, his response to her? Her being seen and unseen? The little girl in the cafe not seeing her?

9. The group, the Asians, the transvestite, the priest and the other members, enthusiasm? The transvestite later blowing the kiss? Sharing the exuberance, filmed?

10. The crisis for Aloys, Vera in the apartment, going outside, inside, wrapped in the curtain, her vanishing? On the balcony, falling over? Yet her being downstairs and walking away? Aloys in the hospital, with a Vera?

11. Aloys as a psychological case?

SAINT AMOUR

France, 2016, 101 minutes, Colour.
Gerard Depardieu, Benoit Poelvoorde, Vincent Lacoste, Celine Sallette, Andrea Ferreol, Chiara Mastroianni, Michel Houellebecq.
Directed by Benoit Delepine, Gustave Kervern.

This is a French film that one feels one ought to like. Here is Gerard Depsrdieu after all these decades, larger-than-life as always, and with white hair, a farmer going into retirement with a son in his 40s, played by the comedian Benoit Poelvoorde. They both have very good screen reputations. and, in addition, there are some cameos by stars in the past including Andrea Ferreol and Chiara Mastroianni.

Because Robert De Niro had appeared in Dirty Grandpa around the same release time, and De Niro and Depardieu had appeared together in 1900, some of the shenanigans in Saint Amour are reminiscent of the crass shenanigans in Dirty Grandpa. But there is something about American crassness that so emphasises the crass that it loses a great deal of the humanity. It has to be said that in many French films, however crass, they still keep a strong sense of humanity – at least ultimately. That is the case here.

Father and son go to Paris for an agricultural show, bringing their prize bull in the hope of winning the competition. The son, Benoit, has a fondness for wine and so he and his friend, Thierry, make a tour of all the stalls, the equivalent of a Tour de France, putting all the business cards on a map to indicate their achievement in sampling so many wines. Then, it seems a good idea for father and son to hire a taxi and two ago on a real tour of France, sampling more wines as they go.

Their driver is a young Frenchman from Paris, Mike (with quite some dialogue criticising him for having a non-French name) who has a story of his own and wants to make different stops to contact women he has encountered in the past.

This means that it is a road trip, arriving in various towns around France, difficulties in finding accommodation, drinking episodes, down into the South and the spectacular visit to the city of Carcassonne, and into the countryside, finally finishing up at an unusual motel where the proprietress is suffering from early menopause and is desperate to become pregnant as soon as possible – with three compliant potential fathers.

There is some amusement in the various episodes, but Benoit Poelvoorde is often more raucous than sympathetic and Depardieu’s father has some ambiguous attitudes while Mike has alienated the different women he visits.

Back to Paris, exhibition of the bull, possibilities for a prize, but back to the farm and to the pregnant woman with Mike realising that he was wasting time in driving around Paris and that there was a better life to be had down on the farm.

And, the title of the film? One of the wines that they drink!

1. French comedy? Odd couple? Road movie? Wine, the title and the wine of Saint Amour?

2. The Paris setting, the preparation of the cattle for the show? On the road, the variety of venues around friends, a wine trip, personal encounters, the range of locations? The musical score?

3. The introduction to father and son, Jean and Gerard Depardieu Bruno and Bruno Poelvoorde? The father, his age, retirement, farming, love of the cattle, devotion to his dead wife, keeping the phone with her voice answer, the disapproval towards his son, his wanting to relate to him, to share the outlook on the farm? The son, his age, appearance, unmarried, work on the farm? His friendship with Thierry? The wine trip around the show, at the different counters, the encounters with the bartenders, chat, the cards, marking the map?

4. Jean looking for his son, the story of the wine trip? Their hiring the taxi and Mike? Going on the road?

5. Mike, his appearance, age, the taxi, the argument about his name and French names? His sharing the journey with them, his own agenda, saying that he had a wife and children, visiting the woman and finding her paraplegic and ill? The twin and her putting on weight, her scratching his car? The story about his illness as a boy, the black tip on his penis? His self-consciousness?

6. The variety of places where the group stayed? Genial master of the hotels, wanting to help them, accommodation, trying to sleep, the snoring, the man and his family, offering them breakfast? The stopping at the restaurant, Jennifer and her awkwardness, the discussion about the wine, opening the bottle, getting the seafood and making a mess with the tank, discussions with Mike, getting the lift home? Her wanting Jean to go in with her? Lying on the bed, audience expectations, the lament about the state of France’s economy? Jean being a good listener?

7. The party in the town, Bruno going off, finding himself in women’s clothing, his father on the sofa?

8. Bruno, sexual encounters, the effect on him? His feeling he was no good with women?

9. Venus, on the horse, inviting her to the rooms, dismal, their waiting for breakfast, the egg? Her wanting sexual encounter with each of them, the discussions with Mike about his illness, Bruno and his willingness, Jean on top of Venus? Her early menopause, her becoming pregnant, each of them claiming to be the father? Life on the farm, Mike giving of his taxi and embracing the open air, father and son working? The future?

10. The French comedy, road trip, sexually explicit and innuendo, French style, the crass humour, yet the overall humane effect of the men, the women, relationships?

THE ONES BELOW

UK, 2016, 87 minutes, Colour.
Clemence Poesy, David Morrisey, Stephen Campbell Moore, Laura Birn.
Directed by David Farr.

Can you have a horror film without what have become the conventions of horror films? The answer is ‘yes’ if you consider The Ones Below.

This is a film about pregnancy, birth, miscarriage, the desire of women and the desire of men to be parents.

This is a brief, small-budget British film. Kate and Justin (Clemence Poesy and Stephen Campbell Moore) are a couple in their 30s who met at university, decided not to have children for several years but now are happy with Kate being pregnant and everything going well. They move into a rental flat and establish their life there, she working at home on computer fashion designing, he at work in an editorial office.

They then see two pairs of shoes outside the door of the flat downstairs, shoes of the ones below. Theresa and Jon (Laura Birn and David Morrisey) have moved in, Theresa being pregnant and becoming friendly with Catherine, inviting her to swimming exercises, to a lunch with Jon, and to come downstairs to have a meal with them.


Theresa and John have been trying to have a child for several years and she is now pregnant.

Probably that is enough of the plot, occurring early in the film, but quite some complications arise, complications which might be exploited in a horror film but, the manner here in the screenplay is a sense of menace, suggestions, moments of fear, concerns about mental health.

There are some audiences and, especially, critics, who have an intense dislike of happy endings (except, one hopes, in real life), so there are elements in the ending of this film which should make them both sad and happy at the same time.

This is a menace film relying, effectively, on audience response to pregnancy and birth and identification with the characters.

1. The title, application, minutes, intimations of horror?

2. London, the suburbs, offices, the streets, the canal? The interiors of the flats? The garden? The contrast with the luxury home in Frankfurt? The musical score? The theme of pregnancy, motherhood, fatherhood? The miscarriage and accidents, the birth process, post-natal care?

3. Kate and Justin, having met at the University, 10 years together, the decision not to have a baby, change of heart, getting older, happy, the ultrasound scenes, care?

4. Justin and his editing work, the staff, Kate and her computer, designed?

5. The flat, moving in, feeling at home, the people downstairs, the shoes outside the door, meeting, the talk of Jon, becoming neighbours? Teresa and her pregnancy, going swimming, taking Kate, the bond between the two?

6. The meal, Jon abrupt and his questioning about their pregnancy, trying for seven years, divorced from his Chinese wife who could not become pregnant? Successful businessman, life in Germany? Teresa and her saying she would not drink, drinking? The genial atmosphere, and the change? The light bulb going, opening the door, the cat, falling, Jon moving her after advice not to, the angers?

7. The confrontation, the truth, Teresa denying she drank? The move to Germany?

8. Teresa and Jon and Kate at the restaurant, the issue of breastfeeding?

9. Kate giving birth, her family, her mother and her inability to respond, not being able to touch? Teresa and the return, making peace, apologies, offering to take care of the baby, in the garden, the photos? Kate going to her brother’s grave? Justin and his taunt about the mental attitudes of her family? Apology?

10. Kate going out, the audience seeing Teresa and the breastfeeding, the second time, Kate’s pretence, seeing the photos, seeing the breastfeeding, Kate going into the flat, not finding any photos, discovering Peter’s room, Jon entering, his anger?

11. Kate and the worries with the baby, going to the doctor, Justin and his care?

12. The finale, the audience thinking it was Kate throwing the baby into the canal, Jon and his false message on the computer, summoning Justin to the meeting, Kate’s apology indicating her suicide? Seeing Kate in the bath? Justin, the funeral, his grief, leaving?

13. The end, Germany, the luxury house, Arriving, Jon comfortable – and Teresa calling the baby Peter?

14. A film of menace with horror implications?

ZJEDNOCZONE STANY MILOSCI/ UNITED STATES OF LOVE

Poland, 2016, 104 minutes, Colour.
Julia Kijowska, Magdalena Cielecka, Dorota Kolak, Marta Nieradkiewicz.
Directed by Tomasz Wasilewski.

We are not certain what the exact translation of the Polish title would be and the English title looks more than a little suspicious because of the overtones of United States. After viewing the film, the word in the English title that should raise suspicions is that of “Love ”. a more accurate title of the film could be “The Disparate Conditions of Lust”.

This is a story from the early 1990s, just after the fall of the Berlin Wall, the transition in Poland from Communist government and ideology to a close link with the West and western section of the culture. In fact, in this particular part of Poland the people look rather drab but are eager to move to the United States of non-drabness.

In one way, the screenplay is cleverly written, focusing on three women and how they deal with these changing situations, especially in terms of relationships and sexuality. It can be noted that many VHS films are becoming more and more available in Poland at the time, especially black market pornography videos, which many are eager to copy and look at.

The way that the screenplay is strangely written is that it focuses on three women who are in some ways connected but actually ends their stories without completing them, leaving it to the audience to wonder and speculate about what would happen.

This is particularly the case with the first woman, Agata, married with a daughter, her husband working in a factory, the daughter at school, and she herself involved in selling and hiring out the videos. Her husband loves her. There is quite an amount of churchgoing, to mass, to funerals, listening to sermons, with the possibility for confession, and the blessing of houses. While there are two older priests, there is a handsome young priest and Agata is obsessed with him, listening to his sermons extolling the glories of love (which he also does with a group of schoolchildren in the classroom), but is so disturbed by his presence in the house that she cannot stay while he is doing the blessing of the house and, then, going to the priest’s house, spying on him as he goes naked to have a shower. For those feeling a bit prurient and wondering what is going to happen, the answer is nothing, except that Agata going back to her husband and a vigorously surprising sexual encounter.

The second story is that of the school Principal, very well dressed, authoritative at school, having some dignity in the town. But, in this United States of Love, she is having an affair with a widower who has a teenage daughter. When he finds her clinging, he ends the affair and acts brutally towards her which devastates her and she behaves recklessly with a young man at the railway station – who tells her that she failed her when he was at school and she was the Principal.

The third story is of an older teacher, who loves teaching literature but who has to resign, being asked by the Principal - and living in an apartment block where the others live. She admires the Principal’s younger sister whose husband has been in Germany for several years earning money to send back to Poland. This younger woman runs aerobics classes as well as swimming pool exercise sessions for older women. The teacher wants to become part of the group, pushes her way to the attention of the instructor, invites her to dinner happily, then contrives an accident on the apartment block staircase to elicit more sympathy from the young woman (who is having her own difficulties of loneliness and wants to capitalise on her once-reputation of being a beauty Queen by having a photo shoot – but is used by an unscrupulous photographer). The old lady has some satisfaction in helping the young woman.

Rather drab lives in a rather drab Poland in brief sketches of about 40 minutes each, effective but certainly open-ended.

1. The title? More like “disparate conditions of lust”?

2. Polish setting, 1990, the re-creation of the period, the look? Talk of the Berlin Wall, united Germany?

3. The structure: the three women as focus?

4. The opening dinner, the single take, the people around the table, the talk, indication of themes, marriages, the husband in West Germany?

5. The initial focus on Agata, her husband, their love, the sexual encounters, his job at the factory, the teenage daughter? The pornographic video? Making copies? Her renting videos? The customers? Going to the church, the focus on the priest, the blessing of the house and her being upset? Seeing him going to the shower? His sermon on no limits of love? Infatuation, lust? Her daughter, at school, the different moods, the holiday in Czechoslovakia? The tensions between husband and wife? Her later anger? Agata staying, going to the aerobics class, the discussions with the Principal? Objectifying the priest, coming home, the sex with her husband? Her future?

6. The Principal, her manner, age, years at the school, dealings with the staff, the students, Solidarity Day? At the initial dinner? Well-dressed? The encounter with the widower, his going to the grave, care for his daughter, renting the video, the affair, the sexual encounter, his leaving, his lies about going, the Principal putting the photo in Wiola’s bag, his coming to the door, punching her, threatening to kill her? The Principal and Wiola in the car, running on the ice, falling through, seeing her in class? Real or not? The encounter with the young man, his story of her failing him at school, the sexual encounter? The discussions with the old teacher, her retirement? What future?

7. The old lady, her enthusiasm in class, love poetry? Her place in the building, seeing her around? The return home, sad, accepting the reality of retirement? Sitting at home, the number of birds? Going to reception appointment and her being snubbed? Going into the water aerobics, the old ladies, the shower, their bodies, her pretending to slip, setting up the scene, the young woman helping, inviting her to the meal – and the birds? The needs, the story of her sister? The wedding dance rehearsal, waltzing with the young woman? Inviting her to the meal, stood up, accusing her of being a whore, discovering the truth, washing her, lying naked on her bed, happy?

8. The row picks, Aerobics, the young woman, the Principal’s sister, her husband absent for many years, his sending videos of him? Alone, lonely, wondering about him? His sister, the aerobics, the old ladies swimming, the wedding rehearsal, responding to the old lady, the meal? Her past, wanting to be a model, the photography session, the photographer, the sex with her, her lying unconscious, the teacher washing her?

9. The men, the husband and his love for his, puzzled by her? The widower, the affair and his violence? The lust of the photographer?

10. The priests, the religious tone of Poland in 1990, the ceremony of the blessing of the house, people going to Mass, the chapel, the priest hearing confessions, the older priest and his sermons, funerals? The young priest, his sermon about love, his talk to the young class about the same theme? His being objectified by Agata? Nothing to indicate the future?

11. Religion and change, sex and pornography, the change in work, the opening up of Poland in the 1990s after repression?

THE HARD CORPS

US, 2006, 110 minutes, Colour.
Jean- Claude Van Damme, Raz Adoti, Vivica A.Fox, Ron Bottitta.
Directed by Sheldon Lettich.


The Hard Corps is one of many, many films made by Jean- Claude Van Damme and released straight to video or DVD. It is his fourth film with director Sheldon Lettich, Lionheart, The Order, Double Impact, who also wrote Blood Sport and Legionnaire for Van Damme.

This film has a particular appeal to male audiences, audiences who like action shows. It is rather late in the film that Van Damme goes into action, with some boxing techniques as well as some kickboxing.

The film has a setting in the African- American world, where a criminal gets an early release from prison with the help of his lawyer nephew (who is a decent man, not wanting to get caught up in his uncle’s work, trying to save the day but ultimately being killed by his uncle). The uncle seems to have a particular grudge against boxing champion, Wayne Barclay, played by Raz Adoti. The uncle had previously killed his younger brother and is now coming to kill him.

Barclay’s sister, Tamara (Vivica A.Fox), a glamorous entrepreneur who manages elaborate shows, is concerned about her brother, gets advice and hires former Afghan veteran, Philippe Sauvage, Van Damme, who is still recovering from traumatic experiences in Afghanistan, his being framed the massacre of some children – but, late in the show, there is a flashback indicating that he is innocent and that someone ignited the flamethrower and Van Damme was trying to do a rescue.

A detective intervenes at various times but audiences will soon realise that he is corrupt, in the pay of the villain – to be ultimately shot by him.

Sauvage employs a group, mainly men, but also a woman, to be a hard-core hard-corps team in case of attack – which comes several times, a range of shootings, the woman being hospitalised, the build-up to a final attack, after death one of his comrades he saved his life in Afghanistan, a fight between the bitter Uncle and Barclay or between Barclay and Sauvage who still does not trust Sauvage and is upset about his relationship with his sister. Ultimately, of course, the villain is killed, the sister who has been taken hostage is freed, glad to be back with Sauvage – and Barclay is now on side, grateful and prepared to employ his group as bodyguards.

EL REY DEL ONCE/THE TENTH MAN

Argentina, 2016, 80 minutes, Colour.
Alan Sabbagh, Julieta Zylberberg.
Directed by Daniel Burman.

Audiences who appreciate Argentinian cinema will be familiar with the name of Daniel Burman. He has made quite a number of films and has received many awards, including Ecumenical Awards.

What makes his films distinctive is that, in a culture which is so Hispanic with traditions of Catholicism, they offer stories of the Jewish community in Buenos Aires (one of the few cities in the world where you can find Kosher Mc Donald’s - which is not open on Sabbath).

His stories are about families, family chronicles, the ups and downs of marriages. It is not quite the same here. Rather, the film opens in New York City where Ariel is engaged to an American dancer, wants her to come to Argentina to meet his father, but has to return without her – although his father is demanding that he bring sneakers with Velcro connections for a patient in hospital. (He can’t find them in many New York stores and so has to try when he gets back home – unsuccessfully).

The structure of the film is seven days of the week, starting Monday, moving through to Sabbath and to the celebration of Purim. It is a kind of cinema diary for Ariel and his activities.

In one way, the activities are fairly straightforward but, on the other hand, all kinds of complications arise. The reason for this is that his father has established a Foundation in the city to cater for the needs of the Jewish population, ranging from supplying food to distributing different kinds of medication to supplying legal advice. And there are always crowds at the Foundation – especially when there is a crisis in the delivery of meat!

Actually, we don’t see the father until the end of the film, he is so busy. He talks with Ariel on the phone and usually is asking an extra favour. For some moments, to help the audience appreciated, Ariel remembers his childhood, cookies and lathering the caramel spread, putting the cookies together, splitting them and choosing the one that had the most spread on it – and then his father, always attentive, nevertheless chooses to give up a school event of Ariel’s to go to become a 10th man, to form a proper Jewish group, at a funeral.

Being available for others is part of the ethos of father and son.

There are quite a number of amusing moments, especially the young man in hospital refusing to have shower or two until he gets a soft towel, demand sporting newspapers and complaining when they are too old and is preparing for an operation – although it is he who gives the audience the explanation of Moses and the need for a 10th man to form a proper group. There is also the gay man who is eager to have a Bar Mitzvah the rabbis are unwilling.

Then there is Eva, working at the Foundation, her father supplying meat, she being considered a sacred person and untouchable – at least up to a point until after some rituals are performed. Ariel and Eva get on particularly well – so what is going to happen to the fiancee who keeps in touch by phone?

And, that’s basically it, a week spent with Ariel, a week spent at the Foundation, a week of imbibing Jewish spirit with different characters, rituals, songs.

1. A film of the Jewish community in Argentina, Buenos Aries? Inviting the audience in to the world, the community, the characters – and sharing the experiences?

2. The title, the focus on the importance of the 10th Man to form a Jewish group?

3. The work of the director, his chronicles of the city, of the characters, humour and serious films? Focus on family, religious customs? Bringing them alive?

4. The opening in New York, the bridges, shops, airport? The contrast with Buenos Aires, the city, the crowded streets, the shops, apartments? The venue of the Foundation? Crowds, deals, the apartment of the dead man, the range of ceremonies and rituals?

5. The structure of the film, the days of the week leading to Sabbath and to Purim?

6. Ariel, his age, size, in New York, his dancer fiancee, her audition, the phone calls, her not coming to Argentina? His father wanting him to buy the sneakers with velcro? The memories with his father, as a boy, the cookies, the caramel spread, splitting and eating the one with more caramel? The bonds with his father, his father deciding to be the 10th man at a funeral?

7. Ariel during these days, moving in to the apartment, meeting his aunt, the workers, the crowds at the Foundation, talking with father only by phone, his father always having excuses and having favours to ask? At the Foundation, the medication, the meat, the crisis, the death? Eva and her father? Eva as stern, not speaking, not to be touched? Ariel dealing with all the situations, with the gay singer wanting the Bar Mitzvah, calling on rabbis and favours? At the hospital, seeing the injured man, the man ordering Ariel around, dissatisfied with the shoes, the out of date paper? The new visit, the up-to-date paper, tipping the nurse, following his father’s orders? The man preparing for surgery, getting the soft towel, having a shower after refusing? And his explanation of Moses and the 10th man?

8. Working with Eva, laconic, going to clean the apartment? The rituals, Eva, kissing, the sexual encounter, the night? The story of her pregnancy and the no good father?

9. Ariel and the experience of the week – leading where?

10. The rituals of the Shabbat, Purim, the crowds, the songs, the ethos?

11. The crisis, the need for the 10th man at the funeral, Ariel deciding to go? His being the King of the 10th men? The end, driving, no word from his fiancee, the relationship with Eva, the discussions with his father, his work for the foundation?

WAR ON EVERYONE

UK, 2016, 97 minutes, Colour.
Michael Pena, Alexander Skarsgaard, Theo James, Tessa Thompson, Stephanie Sigman, Caleb Landry Jones, Malcolm Barrett.
Directed by John Michael Mc Donagh.

You would definitely have to be in a particular frame of mind to go to see War on Everyone – because the screenplay goes to war on customary and expected values, especially in a police force. This is very tongue-in-cheek material and many viewers may not like the taste.

The writer-director, John Michael Mc Donagh, has a British and Irish background (and is not afraid to target both sensibilities in dramatising eccentric characters and what they have to say and do). He created a strong impression with The Guard, a serious and comic look at an Irish policeman, and difficulties with the letter of the law and with corruption. This is definitely the case with the American policeman here. But then, he made a huge impression with his film about the priest targeted by a victim of sexual abuse, Calvary. Advertising, surprisingly, referred to this film as a comedy but most audiences responded to it very seriously, especially with Brendan Gleeson’s performance as the priest.

This film seem worlds away from Calvary.

The setting is Albuquerque New Mexico, and our two “heroes” Terry and Bob, played by Alexander Skarsgaard and Michael Pena, are continually in trouble from their superior, Paul Reiser, because of their unorthodox way of policing (which includes influencing the law and is not above money on the take). Terry has sexual problems but finishes up having a good relationship with a stripper, Stephanie Sigman. Bob, on the other hand, is a family man, a most congenial wife, Tessa Thompson, two boys, one of whom is definitely overweight and the other sometimes slow but, while he is critical of them, he is often a doting father. He seems the least likely of renegade police officers.

One day they are in a museum and realise that a bunch of criminals have gathered there and are planning a big robbery. They check on their contacts, especially an African- American man, Reggie, just out of jail who has a nonchalant Irish friend. Snorting cocaine is involved – a lot of it and by all.The robbery takes place fairly quickly but most of those who perpetrated are found dead, except for Reggie who was the getaway driver.

So, just when least expecting it, the action transfers to Iceland, impressively photographed with snow and landscapes as well as some details of Rejkavik. It is here that money exchanges hands and our ‘heroes’ go back to Albuquerque to see what more they can extract.

The further complication is an English Lord, into drugs and sex as well as money, played by Theo James. There is also an androgynous barkeeper who is in contact with the Lord but is pursued in a huge chase by Terry and Bob.

It doesn’t spoil anything to say that it is all building up to a confrontation between everyone and there is no doubt as to who will win the day and return to the hot spring spa in Iceland.

Audiences who enjoy heavy irony, that has a touch of spoof and satire and the touch of lawlessness is really the target audience for War on Everyone.


1. Spoof, satire? American behaviour and attitudes? Morality? Right and wrong?

2. The director, his writing, his films, his Irish and British background (and his characters from those countries, the dialogue, style)?

3. New Mexico settings, the city of Albuquerque, ordinary homes, apartments, police precincts? The race club? Nightclubs and strip joints? Posh hotels? The contrast with Iceland, the landscapes, the city and its ordinariness, the spa?

4. The cast, the different backgrounds?

5. The musical score, the range of songs, especially those of Glen Campbell, the Clash?

6. Important for the audience not to take the story and characters too seriously? Amoral… Yet? Their anti-racist stances? Terry and sex, venereal disease? Bob, bespectacled, the family, the two sons and his treatment, relationship with his wife? Murders, corruption? Bribes, manipulation – but also something of heroes?

7. The superintendent, lashing them verbally, threats for suspension, their carefree responses, his growing exasperation, the solving of the crime?

8. Intellectual aspects of the screenplay, discussions of philosophy, Simone de Beauvoir and the bets? The intellectual and witty humour? Jokes about Iceland? The variety of vocabulary and its use, meanings, philosophical discussions, arguing the presence of the chair? The surreal tone?

9. Terry and Bob as friends, the different characters, the values, right and wrong, good and bad, fighting crime? Terry and thrush? The reckless driving, bashing cars? Bob, at home, restrained? Yet finding Reggie, indulging in the cocaine, the driving, the cash deal? An odd couple?

10. Bob’s wife, accepting the reality, discussions about the quotations? His sons, the fat one, the computer games, the disguises as daredevils?

11. The visit to the museum, taking the photos, the gathering of the criminals, their planning the robbery? The race track, the English lord and his drug injections, his aristocratic name and manner? At the track, the horses and the interviews with the jockey? Tracking down Reggie, getting out of jail, his being a Quaker and anti-violence? The Irish friend, the repartee? The cocaine, the money deal? Finding Delores, her work as a stripper, home? Their talking, Terry and the attraction, the relationship, moving in?

12. The plan for the robbery, the deaths of the participants? The escape of the driver? The superintendent and his wanting to know how they knew? The information from the Irishman? The trip to Iceland?

13. Birdwell, his friendship with the English lord, effeminate, androgynous? At the track, running the club, his answers to the police, the two confronting him, running, the elaborate chase, the shootings, the injury to his eye, hospital, released?

14. Going to Iceland, the beauty of the landscapes, standing in the centre of town and expecting to find Reggie, his being black? The small population? The interrogation, the explanation of his deal with the Lord, the amount of cash received? Their taking half?

15. The return to Albuquerque, with the Irishman, giving him his commission, getting the information about the Lord? His being taken, interrogated, the Samurai sword and his beheading the Irishman?

16. The scene with the stabbed man in the house, his wife and her grief, the young son, running away, picking him in the street, Terry taking him in, with Delores, home, at the pool?

17. The buildup to the confrontation, the English Lord and his sexual threesome, walking through the hotel, his thugs? Terry and Bob confronting him? All the guns, the shooting, the deaths, Bob and his vest? The death of the Lord?

18. Everybody in Iceland, at the spa? Their amoral ending – the blend of the humour, the spoof on the satire?

SHEPHERDS AND BUTCHERS

South Africa, 2016, 106 minutes, Colour.
Steve Coogan, Andrea RIseborough, Robert Hobbs, Garion Dowds, Deon Lotz.
Directed by Oliver Schmitz.

During the apartheid years, Oliver Schmitz directed a passionate film, Mapantsulal, raising the issues of race, religion and violence in the context of apartheid. He has said that he wanted to make this present film several decades ago but was unable. And now he has made it. And, an arresting and challenging film it is.

The title? This is explained quite late in the film and refers to the guards who work on death row, have to work in close contact with the prisoners, some shepherding, but then having to accompany them to the gallows and participate as butchers.

The setting is 1987. A young man driving a car crashes on a dark night with a minivan and its black footballer passengers. When the vehicles stop and the footballers start to get out of the van, the young man draws his gun and shoots them all dead, lining up the bodies in a row and then disappearing.

The audience is introduced to a lawyer who has been campaigning against capital punishment for many years, John Webber, played by Steve Coogan (very seriously, a far cry from his comedies and his Alan Partridge persona). The young killer, Leon (Garion Dowds) is silent, and unwillingy to communicate with the lawyer and his assistant, seemingly sullen and resigned to his fate. Webber considers his duty done in meeting with the accused.

However, he does have an idea for the defence, consulting a psychologist as well as his brother-in-law who works in the secret forces action programme to discover the effect of the trauma of killing on an individual. He pursues this line, even when the accused does not want it, but is forced to go along with Webber. The judge for the case is severe, a hanging judge and, with some difficulty, he is persuaded to allow this line of action be used. British actress Andrea Riseborough portrays the prosecuting lawyer.

As the trial proceeds, there are many flashbacks as Webber wants to retrace the life of the accused, who joined the prison staff at the age of 17 and killed the men at the age of 19. What emerges in much detail is the ruthlessness of the prison regime, the young man having no preparation for his work on death row, beginning on his second day, having to learn by experience. It emerges that his work requires him to be close with particular prisoners, meals, showers, meeting their relatives, reading the Scriptures to them – and then having to accompany them, make sure that the rope is long enough for their necks to be quickly broken, and clean up the excrement and mess after they die.

The Warrant Officer from the prison comes to court and is an intimidating presence, especially when the accused has to remember his last day, the prisoners revolt and the difficulties in herding the prisoners to the gallows.

Ultimately, the accused cannot remember what he did at the killing. The mothers of the victims are in court challenging Webber as do the parents of the accused. Webber takes the judge and other members of the court to the scene of the murder to try to understand how the accused reacted, especially to the slamming of the door, reminiscent of the sounds of the hanging lever. The court also goes to the prison, with the Warrant Officer demonstrating the pulling of the lever.

While the film has an apartheid background, it is not specifically about apartheid but it is, much more, a film campaigning against capital punishment – with the information at the end about South Africa abolishing capital punishment at the beginning of the presidency of Nelson Mandela in 1995.

An interesting if sobering experience.

1. A film from South Africa, 21st century perspective on the apartheid years? Race issues, justice issues, criminals, capital punishment? Inspired by actual events?

2. The locations, Pretoria, the countryside, the prison, interiors? The white households and luxury? The courts? The musical score?

3. The title, the tone, as explained by John Webber about the guards on death row?

4. The 1987 setting, the situation, the last years of apartheid, the maximum security prisons, the number of prisoners, black prisoners, the record number of executions?

5. Leon, driving, the encounter with the minibus, his stopping, the confrontation, his shooting the men, laying them out, leaving?

6. The case, Leon aged 19, arrest, in custody for six months, being silent, refusing to answer John Webber and his assistant? Wanting to say nothing? The issue of trauma, the parallel with war killings, exploring the theme, the discussions with the psychologist? The basis for the defence?

7. Steve Coogan as John Webber, serious man, his campaign about capital punishment, many years since acting as defence, being unwilling, meeting with Leon, having done his duty, Leon lacking response?

8. Webber’s thought, for the defence, the discussions with Pierre, about action, about the effect of killing? Pierre and his information about the jail? Meeting in the dark place, his anger, drinking after being involved in special action? Webber’s sister and her relationship with Pierre?

9. The meetings with Leon, strict, prepared to have Leon crack, yet his being expressionless?

10. The judge, his associates, the reputation, his conduct of the case, the prosecuting lawyer, her approach, the facts, tough?

11. Interrogation about the facts, their being clear, Leon’s parents present, the mothers of the victims, the parents confronting Webber, the mothers attacking him? His being quite inarticulate with the attackers?

12. His strategy, going back over Leon’s life, prefect at school, religious, guard at 17, his wife, child, drinking, bashing, the separation, there not coming to the court? His being appointed to work on death row on his second day? The role of the Warrant Officer, no criteria for Leon for the job, no training, learning by experience, the end of the first day and his accompanying the prisoner, having to choose him? His fears, wetting the floor? Measuring the length of rope needed for clean break? The hood, the footprints, the dropped to death, the pit and the piss and shit, Leon being sick?

13. Working for two years, the other guards, the effect, the episode when he had to lift the rope because the man was not dead, dropping it twice? The interrogation about his relationship with the prisoners, reading the Bible, getting to know them, meeting their families, meals, showers, then accompanying them to death? The example of the 1919-year-old and Leon thinking he should not be executed?

14. The judge, his opinions, allowing whether to proceed or not, issues of privacy, public record? The objections? The Warrant Officer present – a sinister presence?

15. The interrogation about the detail, the last day, the prisoners rebelling, the fights, the bashings, the executions?

16. Leon calling out to the Warrant Officer, accusing him of not giving him any help?

17. The re-creation of the final day, Leon having no memory of the deaths, some of the scenes coming back? The judge stopping the interrogation?

18. The group going to the site, the noise of the van shutting, everybody shuddering, Webber’s point about noise being the trigger for Leon to kill? The visit to death row, the Warrant Officer demonstrating?

19. Webber, bullying Leon on the stand, strategically, his tears? The prosecutor and her bad interpretation of all the events, saying he was complicit, participating in the jokes? His denials?

20. Webber, the discussions with the prosecutor, her congratulating him on his case?

21. The verdict, Leon not getting the death penalty, prison, possibility of parole? His family reactions? The women? Webber and his satisfaction? The role of his assistant, the examinations, his continued scepticism?

22. Webber and his achievement, the issue of capital punishment, his accusations that the guards were made killers and, therefore, authorities kill them? The singing and dancing outside the court?

23. The information about the ending of capital punishment, the statistics, the end of apartheid, the coming of Nelson Mandela?