THE MAN IN POSSESSION

US, 1931, 84 minutes, Black and white.
Robert Montgomery, Irene Purcell, Charlotte Greenwood, C.Aubrey Smith, Beryl Mercer, Reginald Owen, Alan Mowbray, Forrester Harvey.
Directed by Sam Wood (uncredited).

The Man in Possession is based on a play by H.M. Harwood, which appeared on Broadway in 1930. The film was remade as Personal Property in 1937, a star vehicle for Jean Harlow and Robert Taylor. This original was pre-Code, more innuendo and suggestiveness then was permitted by 1937.

The description given for the plot of Personal Property applies in most detail to this film, even to the central names, to the ne’er-do-well brother, Raymond, played by Robert Montgomery who was a main star at MGM at this time, appearing with its notable leading ladies. Irene Purcell is less known. The maid and cook is played by the lanky Charlotte Greenwood, always a good comedian. The parents are played by C.Aubrey Smith and Beryl Mercer, very British in their manner. The older brother is played by Reginald Owen who took the same role in the later film. Forrester Harvey is the bailiff, a role he also repeated in the later film.

The play is a solid basis for the film, a great deal of dialogue, humour and wit – and with innuendo – and the film consists of various set scenes.

Both films are entertaining in their way – illustrative of the types of comedies of the 1930s which eventually recalled screwball comedies, and marking differences in pre-Code and post-Code treatment of the same themes.


PERSONAL PROPERTY

US, 1937, 84 minutes, Black-and-white.
Jean Harlow, Robert Taylor, Reginald Owen, Una O' Connor, Henrietta Crossman, E.E.Clive, Forrester Harvey.
Directed by W.S.Van Dyke.

Personal Property is based on a play, produced on Broadway in 1930, The Man in Possession, by H. M. Harwood. It was filmed in 1931 with Robert Montgomery and Irene Purcell in the central roles. (Reginald Owen, who plays the older brother here, played that role in the earlier film as did Forrester Harvey as the bailiff.)

The film works as a play, a great deal of dialogue, much of it witty and humorous, with set scenes. It is a star vehicle for Jean Harlow, her second last film, her dying at age 26 after a brief but significant career. She is a bit lower key in this film than in her previous films. Her leading man is Robert Taylor, emerging as a suave hero at this time. The direction is by W.S. Van Dyke, a prolific director at this time and into the mid 40s with a wide range of films, including many of the Nelson Eddy- Jeanette Mac Donald musicals.

Robert Taylor plays Raymond who has just come out of jail, a touch of the ne’er-do-well, the love of his mother, but frowned on by his father and older brother who are in the ladies underwear business but are in need of finance, with the older brother intending to marry an alleged wealthy widow, played by Jean Harlow.

In fact, she is a beauty queen from the United States and has no money either. When his family want to pay off Raymond and get him to go anywhere else in the world, he encounters Jean Harlow, Crystal, and follows her around, embarrassing her at a restaurant, at the opera, and then having a brainwave when he meets a bailiff at her door and takes on the contract, enabling him to be in the house legally, to stay overnight until she pays up.

She is exasperated, wants to get rid of him, pretends that her husband is alive and gets Raymond to stay in the old butler’s room. There is a lot of smart repartee. And Una O’ Connor, is there as the cook and maid.

The main point of the film is that the fiance and his parents are to come to dinner, Raymond not realising who her fiance is. He offers to act as the butler; they have some joking scenes of practice on introducing tests; he then realises what is happening – and is not above playing all kinds of tricks on his increasingly angry brother. There is a social woman, endlessly chattering, with her gold-digging daughter. There is another guest with magnifying glasses because he cannot find his ordinary pair. And, extraordinary, there is a toffy British musician whose talk is la-de-dah and incomprehensible.

The marriage is to go ahead, Raymond tells his father and brother the truth and they get out, Crystal comes downstairs to be married – and there is Raymond.

PERSONAL PROPERTY

US, 1937, 84 minutes, Black-and-white.
Jean Harlow, Robert Taylor, Reginald Owen, Una O' Connor, Henrietta Crossman, E.E.Clive, Forrester Harvey.
Directed by W.S.Van Dyke.

Personal Property is based on a play, produced on Broadway in 1930, The Man in Possession, by H. M. Harwood. It was filmed in 1931 with Robert Montgomery and Irene Purcell in the central roles. (Reginald Owen, who plays the older brother here, played that role in the earlier film as did Forrester Harvey as the bailiff.)

The film works as a play, a great deal of dialogue, much of it witty and humorous, with set scenes. It is a star vehicle for Jean Harlow, her second last film, her dying at age 26 after a brief but significant career. She is a bit lower key in this film than in her previous films. Her leading man is Robert Taylor, emerging as a suave hero at this time. The direction is by W.S. Van Dyke, a prolific director at this time and into the mid 40s with a wide range of films, including many of the Nelson Eddy- Jeanette Mac Donald musicals.

Robert Taylor plays Raymond who has just come out of jail, a touch of the ne’er-do-well, the love of his mother, but frowned on by his father and older brother who are in the ladies underwear business but are in need of finance, with the older brother intending to marry an alleged wealthy widow, played by Jean Harlow.

In fact, she is a beauty queen from the United States and has no money either. When his family want to pay off Raymond and get him to go anywhere else in the world, he encounters Jean Harlow, Crystal, and follows her around, embarrassing her at a restaurant, at the opera, and then having a brainwave when he meets a bailiff at her door and takes on the contract, enabling him to be in the house legally, to stay overnight until she pays up.

She is exasperated, wants to get rid of him, pretends that her husband is alive and gets Raymond to stay in the old butler’s room. There is a lot of smart repartee. And Una O’ Connor, is there as the cook and maid.

The main point of the film is that the fiance and his parents are to come to dinner, Raymond not realising who her fiance is. He offers to act as the butler; they have some joking scenes of practice on introducing tests; he then realises what is happening – and is not above playing all kinds of tricks on his increasingly angry brother. There is a social woman, endlessly chattering, with her gold-digging daughter. There is another guest with magnifying glasses because he cannot find his ordinary pair. And, extraordinary, there is a toffy British musician whose talk is la-de-dah and incomprehensible.

The marriage is to go ahead, Raymond tells his father and brother the truth and they get out, Crystal comes downstairs to be married – and there is Raymond.

THE MAN IN POSSESSION

US, 1931, 84 minutes, Black and white.
Robert Montgomery, Irene Purcell, Charlotte Greenwood, C.Aubrey Smith, Beryl Mercer, Reginald Owen, Alan Mowbray, Forrester Harvey.
Directed by Sam Wood (uncredited).

The Man in Possession is based on a play by H.M. Harwood, which appeared on Broadway in 1930. The film was remade as Personal Property in 1937, a star vehicle for Jean Harlow and Robert Taylor. This original was pre-Code, more innuendo and suggestiveness then was permitted by 1937.

The description given for the plot of Personal Property applies in most detail to this film, even to the central names, to the ne’er-do-well brother, Raymond, played by Robert Montgomery who was a main star at MGM at this time, appearing with its notable leading ladies. Irene Purcell is less known. The maid and cook is played by the lanky Charlotte Greenwood, always a good comedian. The parents are played by C.Aubrey Smith and Beryl Mercer, very British in their manner. The older brother is played by Reginald Owen who took the same role in the later film. Forrester Harvey is the bailiff, a role he also repeated in the later film.

The play is a solid basis for the film, a great deal of dialogue, humour and wit – and with innuendo – and the film consists of various set scenes.

Both films are entertaining in their way – illustrative of the types of comedies of the 1930s which eventually recalled screwball comedies, and marking differences in pre-Code and post-Code treatment of the same themes.

THE MOONLIGHTER

US, 1953, 77 minutes, Black and white.
Barbara Stanwyck, Fred Mac Murray, Ward Bond, William Ching, John Dierkes, Morris Ankrum, Jack Elam.
Directed by Roy Rowland.

The Moonlighter is a disappointing Western from 1953, especially with its strong stars who appeared together in the classic Double Indemnity as well and is There’s Always Tomorrow.

The film was directed by regular western drama director, Roy Rowland. It has a strong supporting cast.

The film opens interestingly with the prospect of a lynching, Fred Mac Murray in jail as a moonlighter, someone who has been rustling cattle at night. The lynch mob is self-righteous and, through a contrived situation, where an awkward man has been put in prison and objects to the dirt and proceeds to clean the prison, is mistakenly taken for Mac Murray and hanged.

Mac Murray escapes, pays for the funeral of the murdered man, lavishly for the town, while making a collection of money and possessions from those attending the wake.

In the meantime, Barbara Stanwyck as his former lover, appears to pay for the funeral but finds out what has happened. Mac Murray has been away from home for five years, suddenly returns, is a challenge to his brother, William Ching, who is in love with Barbara Stanwyck. He works at the bank but is fired.

The film then focuses on a bank robbery, a collaboration with Ward Bond who turns up and persuades Mac Murray to participate and the younger brother decides to be involved as well – much to the disgust of Barbara Stanwyck who has asked Mac Murray to look after his brother.

The robbery is successful but not the getaway and the film shows the brother being killed, Ward Bond turning against Mac Murray to take all the money, Barbara Stanwyck being deputised and confronting bonded shooting him, bringing Mac Murray back to justice but their having an accident at a waterfall and his rescuing her – with the promise to surrender to the authorities. Somewhat flat after the initial strong opening and the routine development.

It seems to be set in the horse era but, suddenly, a car appears at the time of the bank robbery. The film was filmed in 3 D – and the photography is clear.

1. A standard western, good beginning, slacker development, low-key ending?

2. The title, the rustling cattle, criminals, the law, lynching?

3. The western towns, the countryside, horses, the waterfall – and the sudden presence of the car? The musical score?

4. The opening, the lynch mob, Wes in prison, nonchalant, the black man singing, the prisoner, cleaning the cells, the guard running away? Getting the keys from the sheriff, the information about the cell, the wrong cell, lynching the wrong man, knocking out Wes? The graphic presentation of the lynching?

5. Wes, return, organising the funeral, collecting the money and possessions?

6. His returning home, the greeting from his mother? His relationship with his brother, wanting the brother to stay at home? His working the bank? Being fired?

7. Rela, previous love for Wes, going to marry Tommy? Her strong mindedness, memories of the past, getting Wes to promise to care for Tommy?

8. The robber turning up, suspicions in the bank, his plan for Wes, Tommy wanting in, Wes and his resistance?

9. The plan, the robbery, holding everyone up, taking the money, the shooting, Tommy’s death?

10. Wes and his accomplice, taking the car, the escape, the horses? The heart, the accomplice drinking, Wes cooking, the clash, Wes being tied up?

11. Rela, being deputised, knowing where Wes was, the confrontation with the accomplice and his death?

12. Freeing Wes, take him in, the waterfall and the accident, Wes rescuing her, his promise to give himself up? The sudden ending?

LOOKING FOR LOVE

US, 1964, 85 minutes, Colour.
Connie Francis, Jim Hutton, Susan Oliver, Joby Baker, Barbara Nichols, Johnny Carson, George Hamilton, Yvette Mimieux, Paul Prentiss, Danny Thomas, Charles Lane, Jesse White, J C.Flippen.
Directed by Don Weiss.

Audiences who would like to immerse themselves in the atmosphere of the first half of the 1960s, in the spirit of rock ‘n’ roll, of Elvis Presley musicals, of Connie Francis and Where The Boys Are and When the Boys Meet the Girls, Follow the Boys…, this is an easy 85 minutes to do that – exuberant and more than a little corny.

The film is a star vehicle for singer, Connie Francis, who appeared in the aforementioned films. She is a lively presence, not taking herself too seriously, the subject of mishaps and gags as well as frequently breaking into song. The film opens with an audition, with stalwart Jesse White as an agent, but she decides that she wants to marry and have children, will know the right man when he turns up, and will hear bells when she knows – and kisses - the man to marry. She sets her eyes on Jim Hutton, an executive who is more interested in her loopy invention for hanging clothes at night than in her as a person. She, however, is blind to all and continues unabatedly.

Her roommate is played by Susan Oliver, a bright presence, who herself is in love with Hutton. After some disastrous mishaps in the supermarket, she becomes friends with a bass player, played by Joby Baker.

She makes a mess of her career at a brokerage, especially with the phone exchange. But, she gets an opportunity to sing at a noisy club and then is hired as a replacement on the Danny Thomas show where, despite the mayhem, she makes a hit and receives many bookings.

This gives the opportunity for a number of guest appearances, if it means Yvette Mimieus and Paul Prentiss having only about a line each as well as being knocked on the head. Johnny Carson appears, early in his Late Night Show. George Hamilton is an actor for Connie Francis’ screen test and Danny Thomas sings with her.

There a mixup with the boss of the company, J C.Flippen, and whole of a lot of romantic misunderstandings until the roommate organises, literally, bells to ring when she kisses Jim Hutton and Connie Francis kisses Joby Baker.

Directed by Don Weise who directed a lot of television over many decades but began with small budget MGM films including A Slight Case of Larceny, I Love Melvin…

AN ORDINARY EXECUTION/ UN EXECUTION ORDINAIRE

France, 2010, 105 minutes, Colour.
Andre Dussollier, Marina Hands, Edouard Baer, Denis Podalydes.
Directed by Marc Dugain.

An Ordinary Execution is based on a novel by the writer-director of the film, Marc Dugain. It is of Russian story from the French perspective.
It is 1952, Joseph Stalin is ill, it is coming towards the end of the dictator’s reign. He has become more paranoid, dismissing his doctors, his bodyguard, and summoning a young doctor who has a reputation for healing to care for him. This is a secret and she is compelled to deceive her husband about why she is absent from home. He is a physicist and they have been trying to conceive a child.

The film explores the relationship between the dying dictator and the young doctor, her professional care, her own personal feelings, the temptation to do something about Stalin’s life and its ending.

There is something of a hopeful ending with husband and wife together again Stalin dies and there is a possibility of a new era in Soviet Russia

Andre Dussollier a is very persuasive as Stalin. Marina Hands is also persuasive as the doctor.

1. Russian story? The 1950s? The story of Stalin, his illness, his death? The end of the Stalinist era?

2. A French perspective, the writer and his novel, screenplay, directing the film?

3. The title, in relation to Anna, in relation to Vassilly?

4. The atmosphere of Russia, Moscow, the bleak 1950s, the exteriors, interiors, dark? A film of the interiors? Stalin, the end of his life, paranoid about doctors, bodyguards, suspicions? His meetings? The background of prison in Moscow, the gulags?

5. Stalin’s character, audience knowledge of him? His destructive history? His life, his rule in Russia? The police and security? The end of his life, his health?

6. Anna, her life, her husband, the marriage, wanting to conceive a child – and the complaints by the concierge about the noise of their passion? Her work, reputation, healing power? The husband, his work, physicist?

7. The approach by the police, work, the secrecy, the consent she gave? Her husband, the story, separation, divorce? The attempt to protect a husband?

8. The experience with Stalin, the discussions, fears, psychological, emotional interaction? The practice with him? The potential for killing him?

9. The effect of the experience Stalin’s death? The husband life, being united again?

10. The apartment, the concierge, his interventions?

11. The film as a chamber piece, characters, the situation – in the context of the 1950s and the Soviet Union?

SUCKER PUNCH

US, 2011, 110 minutes, Colour.
Emily Browning, Abbie Cornish, Jena Malone, Vanessa Hudgens, Jamie Chung, Carla Gugino, Oscar Isaac, Jon Hamm, Scott Glenn, Gerard Plunkett.
Directed by Zack Snyder.

Move over Boys’ Own Story. Here is Girl’s Own Story.

Though, on reflection, how true is this? Certainly, the girls are the centre of the action. There is no romance in the air or on the screen. These girls are warriors. But, not all of them survive the film. Those who do and those who don’t are the victims of male brutality and malice and the girls’ final victory is not all that great. The story comes from a man, director, Zack Snyder, who wittingly or unwittingly (we can give him the benefit of the doubt, but...) places his leads in exploitative situations; they have to pander to exploitative men and then the screenplay turns on the girls. The only friendly man is played by Scott Glenn as a cross between guru, commander and your local bus driver.

Whether the audience will think about the film this way will be interesting to find out.

For those who see it and might feel they are not quite on the wavelength, especially with some of the early plot jumps (which make you wonder whether you missed something or weren’t quite paying attention), just stay with it because it does all work out. You can tell there is something strange because the heroine, Baby Doll (Emily Browning, a mixture of the angry and the coy without as much zip as she might, especially compared with some of the other girls) is orphaned, the victim of a cruel stepfather, taken to an institution for the mentally insane (sic) and suddenly finds herself in a sleazy (very) club being trained to do exotic dances for gross wealthy customers.

Baby Doll meets Sweetpea (Abbie Cornish who is much more vital than Emily Browning) and her sister, Rocket (Jena Malone). There is Blondie (Vanessa Hudgens from the High School Musical films). They are being trained by a weirdly exotic kind of KGB dance instructress (Carla Gugino) and a slimy club owner (Oscar Isaac, who has played both St Joseph and Jose Ramos Horta in his time). Quite a lot of parody of other films here.

When Baby Doll is asked to dance and the music turned on, she escapes into several alternate worlds, World War, a Kingdom of Dragons...) where she accomplishes tasks which she hopes will enable her to escape from this imprisoning club where it turns into a Junior Kill Bill.

And, then, it all makes sense, more or less, but not exactly the feminist triumph that we thought it was going to be.

Zack Snyder obviously loves exotic sets, decor, costumes, special effects, as we have seen in his Dawn of the Dead, 300, Legends of the Guardians – the Owls of Ga’hool, and Watchmen. They are quite elaborate and fantastic here which, along with an often pounding score, make Sucker Punch a film of the senses (not always of the sense).

1. The graphic comic book film, the new tradition of graphic comics, differences, the world of the imagination, interior worlds and imaginations, the asylum, new worlds of the brothel, of Dragons and warriors, the world of fantasies?

2. The director, his films, action and fantasy?

3. The title, the reference to each of the characters?

4. Locations, interiors, the asylum, rooms and corridors, the doctor’s office, the imagination of the club, the brothel, the restaurants and performance, the clients? Sinister? The fantasy worlds and the imagination? The musical score?

5. The credits, the collage, the introduction to characters and themes?

6. Babydoll, her name, appearance, age, clothes, home life, her oppressive stepfather? The cruelty, taking her into an institution, handing her over to the authorities, the interviews, the desire for a lobotomy and control of her?

7. The interiors of the asylum, Babydoll, the girls, Sweet Pea, Amber, Rocket, Blondie – the characters, age, appearances, within Babydoll’s imagination?

8. Dr Gonski, as a doctor, the touch of the Nazi? As a madam in the brothel, her personality, cruelty, control? The attack against her?

9. Dancing in the brothel, exotic? The girls, their being subdued – the clashes with the clients? The feminist stance – as well as exploitation?

10. Blue, his role in the brothel, management, cruelty, action against him, his being stabbed?

11. The women, their deaths? Sweet Pea – as an alternate ego for Babydoll?

12. Babydoll and her moving into the world of fantasy, Dragons in the imagination, the girls as warriors, the battle sequences?

13. In the brothel, the clients, the sales – and the wealthy client, turning out to be the doctor?

14. The emotions of the audience in a fantasy world – to what purpose?

THE AMERICAN

US, 2010, 105 minutes, Colour.
George Clooney, Irinia Bjorklund, Johan Leysen, Paolo Bonacelli, Thekla Reuten, Violante Placido.
Directed by Anton Corbijn.

Decline of a hitman.

Who are all those hitmen that we see in thrillers? Where do they recruit all those security guards that seem to appear out of nowhere when somebody threatens a gangster or a Mafia boss? What do they do when they are not hitting?

You won’t get answers to all these questions in The American but you will get a portrait of a hitman who is tiring, beginning to form relationships he never dared to form before, but who is trapped by bosses who want him to do one more job. And then he will get out? The boss says yes, but will he? Or will he outwit any threats? But, ultimately, we never learn anything in detail about the hitman’s past. The probing is all in the present.

This is a film with strong continental European sensibilities. While there are some action sequences, there are a lot more inaction sequences. Not that these aren’t interesting. Psychologically, they are, and the audience has plenty of time to observe Jack, the American, assess his emotional crises (using prostitutes in the past and in the present for pleasure with no commitment but finding he needs love and attachment), reflect on the possibility of his redemption (becoming friendly with the local parish priest and discussing sin, confession and atonement).

The screenplay has been written by Rowan Joffe who went on to write the screenplay for and direct a new version of Grahame Greene’s Brighton Rock. This doesn’t seem surprising given the Greene-like character of the American (a burnt-out case) and his Greene-like conversations with the priest.

The film has been directed by Dutch photographer, Anton Corbijn, who directed the film about Ian Curtis and the band, Joy Division, Control. The film is most attractive and photogenic. With opening settings in snow-clad Swedish forests, some sequences in busy Rome but most of the film’s action taking place in the Abbruzzi, the audience will feel that they have spent time in the mountain towns and got to know the countryside and the feel of the place. Corbijn must be a fan of Abbas Kierostami since he has even more shots, long distance, of cars travelling the mountain roads than Kierostami has of cars on and over the mountains of Iran.

And the star is George Clooney. This is a very serious role and played with seriousness and an interior intensity that Clooney and the director communicate with some dialogue but more with silent, almost inexpressive close-ups which nevertheless invite us to ponder what is going on inside Jack’s head. This is especially true of the final sequence in the car where we understand, without a word being spoken, the crisis for Jack.

Fans of Clooney who want fast-paced action from him will be disappointed, despite the expertise Corbijn brings to some violent events, and perhaps neglect the strong performance the star is giving. The supporting cast consists of European actors rather than names. Violante Placido brings a powerful sensuality to the role of the prostitute, Clara. And Paolo Bonicelli shows how an elderly priest can be pastoral despite his own limitations (more than a touch of the Morris West Italian novels here).

The American may be best served by being labelled an Art-house introspective psychological thriller.

1. Spy and assassins? The different kinds of assassin and agent? A film of stillness, quiet, introspection?

2. The title, generic, anonymity?

3. The Swedish landscapes, frozen lakes and snow, forests? The busy city? Rome? Italy, the Abbruzzi, the beauty, the forests? The time? The musical score?

4. Genre and the usual conventions of the spy story, coming in from the cold, variety of jobs, authorities, retirement, danger, disillusionment?

5. George Clooney as an icon, his career as an agent, involved yet detached? In Sweden, the relationship, assassination attempt? The death of the assassins, the death of his lover? violence, the deaths, the effect on him, escape from Sweden?

6. Going to Italy, involved in Rome, the city? The mountains, the beauty, living anonymously,, the authorities finding him? The commission of the gun? The Belgian and her influence, the commission? The prostitute, her personality and character, and involvement with Jack? His life, his work with the gun?

7. The betrayal, the Belgian women, the attempt on his life, her taking the rifle, her own death? The authorities wanting him out of the way?

8. The local colour, the significance of Jack’s discussions with the priest, sin, guilt, redemption, theology and spirituality?

9. Jack disillusioned?

10. The attack, Jack and Clara and the relationship, her exotic beauty, the attempt to escape?

11. Jack, wounded, dying, the end of an era?

12. Reflective film rather than an action film about killers, assassins, their active life, their interior life?

THE GREAT GARRICK

US, 1937, 89 minutes, Black and white.
Brian Aherne, Olivia de Havilland, Edward Everett Horton, Melville Cooper, Lionel Atwill, Marie Wilson, Lana Turner, Etienne Girardot.
Directed by James Whale.

For those who enjoy a spoof of history, of literature, of the theatre, for those enjoyed Shakespeare in Love or Anonymous and the parodies of the Shakespearean era and theatre, this will be a highly entertaining film.

The setting is the 18th century, London, and David Garrick as the actor of his day. The introduction to the film says this is what might have been. Garrick is acclaim for his performances of Hamlet but shocks his audience by saying that he has been invited to Paris by the Comedie Francaise and intends to go. The audience response is boos and the throwing of fruit and vegetables. He interprets this as a compliment and that patriotism means he must go to Paris – and the audience then endorsing this.

In the meantime, the members of the Comedie Franciase are not amused when they hear that Garrick has ridiculed them. The president, Melville Cooper, and playwright Beaumarchais, Lionel Atwill, encourage the cast against Garrick and they conceive a plot where they will occupy an inn before he comes to Paris and humiliate him.

The film as amusing as the members of the Comedie Franciase try to act as if they were country types in an inn, the president pretending to be the innkeeper, Beaumarchais as a guest, one of the actors wanting to be mad, and giggling maids including Marie Wilson and Lana Turner.

Garrick arrives with his assistant, Tubby, Edward Everett Horton, and immediately suspects there is something wrong. This is compounded when Germaine arrives, the young woman fleeing her home and an arranged marriage – played by Olivia de Havialland. Garrick assumes she is an actress and leads her on.

The actors go through quite a number of farces, Garrick leading on and then explaining why they gave such poor performances. The result is they do invite him to Paris and he is to appear in Don Juan, but melodramatically declines because of his treatment of Germaine – who is in the audience and the show and the romance go on.

The film was directed by British James Whale, making Journeys End in the United States and going on to make Frankenstein, Bride of Frankenstein as well as the first film version of Showboat. Bill Condon’s Gods and Monsters is a story about Whale in his retirement, where is played by Ian Mc Kellen.

1. David Garrick, London, the 18th century, Shakespearean theatre? Jealousy between London and Paris?

2. A Warner Brothers production, the 1930s, the story, the strong cast, the career of the director?

3. A historical romp, what might have happened, audiences suspending disbelief?

4. The film’s origins as a play, designs the played scenes, strong dialogue, sets? Drama, melodrama, farce, romance?

5. David Garrick, his British style, speaking, delivery? His ego? His reliance on Tubby? The scenes from Hamlet? The performance, histrionics, the audience, atmosphere, applause?

6. His speech, the invitation to Paris, the audience reaction, throwing fruit and vegetables, his taking this is a compliment, explaining how, for England’s sake, he must go to France?

7. The Comedie Francaise, its reputation, in France, across the Channel? Cross-channel jealousies? The meeting of the actors, the speeches, their rhetoric, high drama, condemnation of Garrick? The role of the president and his leadership? Beaumarchais and his writing, his interventions, a plot? The carry on at the meeting? The plan?

8. The Inn, taking it over, Picard as the innkeeper, the cast and their various roles, performance styles, contrived? The insults and the swordfights? The emotional triangle? The various devices to entrap Garrick?

9. Jean., the prompter, his interventions for Garrick, the cast ridiculing him, throwing him out? His visit to Garrick, his memories of acting with him, his admiration, his warning about the plot? Garrick not remembering, playing up to Jean?

10. Garrick arriving at the Inn, the manner of Picard, with Tubby? The entrance, the difference, the room, the behaviour of everyone? The giggling of the maids, the man wanting to be insane? The meals? Garrick and his suspicions?

11. Germaine, arriving, the romantic story, Garrick not believing it, thinking she was an actress? Giving her his room? The talks, the frog in the bed, her fears, the romance, leading her on, her inexperience, running away from home, the arranged marriage, her response to Garrick?

12. The farcical behaviour? Their being unmasked? Garrick and his explanation of why they failed in their performance, the waiter holding a tray, Picard and his bowing? Yet his thinking Germaine an actress?

13. The revelation that she was not? His bungling her away?

14. The cast, response to Garrick, admiration, inviting him to Paris, the performance of Don Juan, in costume, his not wanting to go on, his performance about his treatment of Germaine, going to make a speech, her being in the audience, his change of speech, falling in love, proposal? And the show going on?

15. Audience enjoying this kind of tongue-in cheek spoof of literary history?

I AM BIG BIRD: THE CAROL SPINNEY STORY

US, 2014, 90 minutes, Colour.
Directed by Dave La Mattina, Chad N.Walker.

The last words before the final credits of this documentary are ‘unconditional love’. They are spoken about the subject of the film, Caroll Spinney. But they also indicate the tone of the film, the perspective of the directors, unconditional love for Spinney, a documentary that it is your eulogistic, emotional, even affectionate.

And who is Caroll Spinney? And a big percentage of the answer is: Big Bird.

So many audiences will remember Big Bird as a part of their lives. Older people might remember their children sitting in front of Sesame Street. Others, who are not as young as they used to be, will remember sitting in front of the television themselves watching Sesame Street. and, that will apply to many of the younger generations. Big Bird will be remembered is that eight feet high, yellow-feathered, gawky looking, childlike-sounding, huge puppet with the stranger red striped trousers.

While the voice had its squeaky tone, inside Big Bird was a puppeteer, Caroll Spinney, who spent more than 40 years as Bird – and was still doing is at age 79 don’t.

We are taken through the biography of Spinney, his early interest in puppets, in puppeteering, going to a convention in Salt Lake City in the late 1960s, encountering Jim Henson, the celebrated puppeteer who establish the Muppets, being invited by Henson to participate in bringing his puppets alive, movements of hesitation and doubt, then finally finding his stride, so to speak, as big Bird (and the contrast with his voice of Oscar the Grouch).

Spinney is an engaging character on screen – not without some difficulties with fellow-workers. But, he is a veteran puppeteer, his right arm extended high as he manipulates Big Bird’s head and mouth, but also a clown, Big Bird’s movements, antics, voice, comedy routines. As the decades have gone on, Spinney has developed character of Big Bird, endearing him to his children’s audience.

On the personal level, Spinney was married and his co-workers confirmed that his wife did not understand or appreciate his puppeteering work. After a divorce, he was to marry Debra, his wife of many decades, mother of his children, and his manager, sharing a wide range of life experiences with him, including a visit to China, for a television special, Big Bird in China, where a local Chinese girl participated in the program, whom they lost sight over many years but with whom they are reunited at the end of the 30th anniversary of the show.

One of the interests is the changing appearance of Caroll over the 40+ years of Big Bird, young, middle-aged, older.

We meet a lot of the people who worked with Jim Henson, including archival footage of Henson himself, well appreciated by fans of Sesame Street and, of course, the Muppets, especially Kermit – and, at his funeral service after his unexpected death at 53, Big Bird’s singing one of the songs, about being green. There are a lot of talking heads in the film, especially one of the best-known puppeteers and film directors, Frank Oz. While there is a great deal of admiration, there are many insights into the development of Sesame Street and the demands made on all those who contributed.

By and large, there is a great deal of sweetness and light – even in an unexpected situation where a woman was murdered on a property owned by Caroll and Debra, by someone that they had employed. The murdered woman sister and husband are interviewed, talk about the grief and the anger, even directed towards Caroll and Debra, but a reconciliation that is quite moving. The other big reconciliation is Caroll’s bonding with his father in his final years, a man who was a hard taskmaster when the boy was young which led to a great deal of resentment but, ultimately, to some love.

This documentary is not essential viewing, but will appeal to the Sesame Street admirers over the years – and will be of interest in tracing a significant aspect of American television in the last decades of the 20th century – and continues -, Caroll 79 and still going at the time of the making of the film - into the 21st century.

1. A human interest story? Eulogy? Emotion? Affectionate?

2. The television industry story? Jim Henson and his puppets and their influence? Sesame Street and the Muppets? Big Bird over 40 years? Oscar the Grouch? Children’s television and its influence? In entertainment? In education?

3. Big Bird as an icon, extraordinary popularity, as exemplified in the program, Big Bird in China?

4. Archival footage, Caroll Spinney and his life, as young, moving to New York, puppetteers’ convention, the connection with Jim Henson, Sesame Street, Big Bird, the program in China, seeing him on the set, rehearsals, writers, producers, directors, choreographers?

5. The range of talking heads, the cast and the technical qualifications? Their paying tribute to Caroll Spinney?

6. The young Caroll, his self-image, his strict and demanding father, his mother, his story, the wife of 11 years, not appreciating his work, the encounters with Debra, proposing, marrying her, sharing everything, her being his manager, the episodes in China? Love, support, the interviews with his children?

7. The reputation of Jim Henson, his work, admiration, clever, his sudden death, Big Bird singing the green song at his funeral?

8. The range of personalities, the writers like John Stone, the presence of Frank Oz, the young puppeteer who impressed Spinney and who would be his successor?

9. Making Big Bird, inside the character, the voice, movements, the clowning? Success and appreciation?

10. The interlude about the murder, the reaction of the murdered woman’s sister and husband, their angers, targeting Caroll and Debra, the embrace in the supermarket, the memorial garden, an episode of reconciliation?

11. Caroll, his age, getting to know his father better, his reflections? The achievement? The honorary Emmy for his life’s work? The film finishing with the words ‘unconditional love’?

SOMETHING NEW

US, 2006, 99 minutes, Colour.
Sanaa Lathan, Simon Baker, Earl Billilngs, Alfre Woodard, Katherine Towne, Taraji P.Henson, Mike Epps, Lee Garlington, Blair Underwood, Donald Faison.
Directed by Sanaa Hamri.

The Something New of the title is not the material of romantic comedy. In fact, the plot follows the main themes of many a romance, someone uptight, someone genial, genial breaking through the tensions, falling in love, personal difficulties, separation, finally admitting the truth, happy ever after.

The something new is the fact that this is an interracial romantic comedy. In mainstream American cinema, there was a big breakthrough in 1967 with Guess Whose Coming to Dinner. In many ways, in decades since, this is taken for granted – although, the screenplay makes a great deal about sensitivity towards racial issues.

The film also focuses on the place of women in contemporary American society. The leading lady, Sanaa Lathan, is a well educated business executive who eventually becomes partner in the firm, despite her apprehensiveness, feeling she had to fight harder than others for promotion. She is rather uptight with an academic family background – with more than a touch of superiority. The leading man, Simon Baker, is a landscape gardener, full of charm, who breaks through the tension and the couple fall in love.

Earl Billings and Alfre Woodard are the parents, Mike Epps a chef who is critical then supportive, Donald Faison is an interfering brother and Blair Underwood as a charming African- American alternative. The director originally comes from Morocco.


1. Romantic comedy? 21st-century style? Genial, tense?

2. Into racial issues, racial equality, the problems for African- Americans, for whites? Minorities and prejudice? The repercussions for the minorities? Proving themselves?

3. The black focus, the parents being in Kenya, academics, the daughter called up to the country? Kenya and her family, her friends? Being part of the African- American minority? Brian and his becoming a minority amongst the African- Americans? Mutual expectations and demands?

4. A film about women, African- American women, status, the workplace, suspicions? Their abilities, talented, frustrated?

5. King’s story, her family, her father as a doctor, his story about running away with her mother? Her mother, arrogant, academic? Her brother, the continual succession of girlfriends, his prejudices? Kenya as uptight, her good job and education, tough in the business world, having to prove herself, the client and his wariness? The boss and his encouraging her?

6. Her girlfriends, their concern, wanting her to lighten up, sex issues, arranging the blind date, meeting Brian, her initial reaction, his being white, their conversations?

7. The new house, the party, the garden landscaped, the irony of being introduced to Brian, the reaction?

8. Brian, personality, nice, past girlfriends? Advertising work, landscaping skills? Plans and design? The visit to Kenya’s house, her accepting him to do the work, his presence, the work, assistant, the reactions? His comments about her personality, time off, hiking and the effect on her, getting wet, the kiss, the sexual relationship? The effect on each other? The change in Kenya, relaxed?

9. Kenya’s brother, his continual comments, his promoting Mark, Mark and his charm, the party, wanting an apartment, asking Kenya to help, their going out, the dinner at her parents’ house?

10. The girlfriends, their personalities, encouragement? The new house, the dedication, the party, the girlfriends, her parents and their wariness about Brian? Walter and his presence, initially suspicious of Brian, his change?

11. Brian, the encounter in the supermarket, his bad mood, Kenya and her experience at work, wanting to talk, his irritation? Her cutting him off? Absence for two weeks?

12. Kenya, Mark, together, his proposals, the possibilities, her not wanting them, getting out of the car?

13. At her work, the client, his anxiety, her straight talk at the meeting, her being made partner?

14. Going to the Cotillon, the formality, her reactions? Parents and friends, the meal, her mother upset at her comments? Walter and his standing up for Brian? Her friends and helping her to understand herself?

15. The decision, leaving, admitting that she loved Brian, talking to him, the reconciliation, mutual love, the transition to the wedding?

16. Romance, the rapport between the leads, sensitivities to male-female issues, race in issues? Love?