AVENGERS: AGE OF ULTRON


US, 2015, 141 minutes, Colour.
Robert Downey Jr, Chris Hemsworth, Mark Ruffalo, Chris Evans, Scarlett Johansson, Jeremy Renner, James Spader, Samuel L.Jackson, Don Cheadle,
Aaron Taylor-Johnson?, Elizabeth Olsen, Paul Bettany, Cobie Smulders, Anthony Mackie, Hayley Atwell, Idris Elba, Stellan Skarsgaard, Linda Cardellini, Claudia Kim, Thomas Kretschman, Aney Serkis, Julie Delpy, Stan Lee, Henry Goodman.
Directed Joss Whedon.


Some films are issues-driven. Some films are character-driven, out of which conflicts emerge. Some films are conflict-driven, out of which some character qualities emerge. Avengers is the latter kind of film, exceedingly conflict-driven. The characters we already know and there is little character-development – but a bit.

The initial Avengers film took in almost $2 billion around the world. It seems to be the most financially successful film of all time. Obviously, it has a built-in audience and so there is very little need for publicity or for review or critical comment. If you screen it, they will come! In fact, all the Avengers come and so will large audiences. Part of the enjoyment is to see one’s favourite avenger(s), meet them again, see them in action, all-conquering.

Robert Downey Jr is there once again as Tony Stark, Iron Man, working initially in his laboratories to create artificial intelligence, realising that he has created a cyber-monster, Ultron, who wishes to destroy him. He has to don his Iron Man suit to go into combat. In the laboratory he is assisted by Dr Banner (Mark Ruffalo), making every effort not to turn green, not to be angry and become The Hulk (which, of course, he does several times). In one character development, he is attracted to Natasha (Scarlett Johansson), the reformed assassin, and she to him. She is not particularly enamoured of The Hulk, but finally admits that this transformation is necessary if the Avengers are to win their battles.

Captain America (Chris Evans), the all-American, upright character, no swearing allowed, who belonged back in the 1940s before he was frozen enters into the spirit of things. Then there is the family man, Hawkeye (Jeremy Renner) who with his arrows is a useful backup to the principal avengers, but he is always wanting to go home to his wife and family.

And, from another time, from another planet, there is Thor. And Chris Hemsworth is a big and brawny warrior but with perfect English articulation, deep voice and precision as if he was speaking the classics. He gives himself over to fight all these earthly battles that the avengers are involved in.

In the initial Eastern European siege, brother and sister with ultra-human powers, (Aaron Johnson-Taylor? and Elizabeth Olsen) are linked in with Ultron but ultimately join the Avengers – and so, more fights.

Ultron (voiced by James Spader) immediately goes into hostile action, absorbing Jarvis (voiced by Paul Bethany who, later in the film, is seen in human, well cyber-human, form as yet another Avenger.

Which means than the screenplay is crowded, or, really, over-crowded, with each of the Avengers looking for screen time as well as finding various opportunities for combat. Which also means that the film is battles and confrontations, with a little spacing between for some human drama.


1. A popular film? Super heroes? Superheroes together?

2. The financial set successively regional film? An enormous world fan base for the film? The appeal of superheroes, comic style, the visuals, the characters, dialogue, deadpan humour?

3. The world to be saved, evil, Nick Fury and his character, his role, assembling the avengers?

4. The cast, there are established characters, audience familiarity and wanting to see them? The new avengers?

5. Special effects, action, the many many battles? The musical score?

6. Plausibility and implausibility? Audiences accepting this kind of fantasy? The blockbuster mentality?

7. The developments in the plot, artificial intelligence, the emergence of evil, the need for confrontation, each of the characters, the perspective on the crisis, their individual skills in contributions, United?

8. The title, the focus on Ultron, Tony Stark and his experiments, the creation of the artificial intelligence, its becoming incarnate? Immediately turning against the creator? Evil? Dr Banner and his presence, amazement? Jarvis as Tony Stark’s helper, robot? Ultron absorbing Jarvis? Multiplying, prior, control and confrontation?

9. The avengers, audiences familiar with them? Iron Man and his suit? Hulk and his rage? Natasha, the reformed assassin and her working with Dr Banner and The Hulk? Captain America, the nice guy from the 1940s? Thor, articulate, the clashes with low key, everybody trying to lift his hammer? Hawkeye and his family?

10. The opening siege, the castle, the avengers and the action? The two new characters, brother and sister, the powers, their being demonstrated, their personalities, with Ultron, on the side of evil? The change? Each of them in action?

11. Each of the avengers, each having their own battle? Jarvis becoming an avenger? The film crowded with avengers, each getting their own space, each wanting their own battle?

12. The city, the evacuation, protection, the fights?

13. The humans touches? The quiet with Hawkeye and his family? Natasha and her attraction to Dr Banner, elements of romance?

14. The avengers fighting and living to fight another day?

THE SALT OF THE EARTH

France/ Brazil, 2014, 111 minutes, Colour.
Sebastiao Salgado, Wim Wenders, Juliano Ribeiro Salgado.
Directed by Juliano Ribeiro Salgado, Wim Wenders.

This humane documentary combines the story of the Brazilian photographer, Sebastiao Salgado, with a gallery of his powerful photographs, taken over many decades, and a study of the people and places where he photographed.

The narrative begins with photographs of the silver mine in Brazil, the many gnarled characters scaling rocks, drilling, all eager to find some silver – and the commentary adds that people are the salt of the earth.

Celebrated film director, Wim Wenders, tells us that he came across one of these portraits, a study of a woman, and has had it hanging over his desk for many years. Which means that he was very pleased to be associated with this film, co-directing with the photographer’s son, Juliano Ribeiro Salgado, a cinematographer himself.

Introduced to the gallery with black-and-white photographs of the silver mine, the audience will be in intrigued as to the background of the photographer himself. He came from a poor family in Brazil, moved to the city for further education, especially in economics, got a job, married, and seemed to have a future in international companies with economic advice. However, he loved photography and decided that would give his full time to this work, supported by his wife who managed his photos, cataloguing, especially when on long trips.

Which he did. In those days, in the 1960s and 70s, he was tall and thin and rugged, wild hair and long beard. As he is interviewed for this film, often with super impositions of his face on locations and photographs, he is older and bald, but intensely serious, a lifetime of concern for his subjects and with profound and moving reflections.

Among the journeys he took was across South America, taking almost a decade. He is also shown visiting West Papua with its jungles and indigenous people. The journey which he found most heart-wrenching was that to Ruanda at the time of the genocide in 1994, observing, photographing, being caught up in the deep distress, finding that he could not go on photography expeditions for several years.

What caused him to be involved again was his awareness of the environment, the depredation of forests in his native Brazil, and his setting up an institute with his wife for the reforestation. Audiences will be amazed at the number of trees and the depth of the forests that have resulted from these initiatives. This also gave fresh impetus to his photography career, starting a Genesis Project, focusing on nature – and people - especially with intriguing photography of his working with the Brazilian jungle native community long hidden from “civilisation”.

By the end of the film, photographed in some detail by his son, co-directed by Wenders, the audience will have had a masterclass in photography but also a masterclass in human compassion, seeking out the salt of the earth and communicating something of their destinies, lives, hopes.

1. A film for photographers, for those who like cinema and photography?

2. The title, the salt of the earth being people, the photographs of people, the variety of situations?

3. The film is photography and biography, the Brazilian background, the village, the photographers education, his father and the farm, going to the city, his education, meeting his wife, studying economics, financial adviser, job prospects? Get his life and photography, enjoying it, the situation, his wife and son, full-time, the exhibition and launching a career?

4. The directors of the film, the photographer son, his part in his father’s life, his skills as a cinematographer? Wim Wenders and the story of his finding the photo, Annie get in his room, interest in the photographer? Taking on the role as producer and co-director?

5. The narration, the photographer’s life, the variety of the projects, over the decades, international success? His films in ethnography? The focus on his experience in wonder, the sufferings, the massacres, the inhumanity, the victims? His sense of despair? Some years without photography? Discovering nature, his Genesis project? He and his wife establishing the Institute, the reforestation, the millions of trees, the consequences? Bringing nature to people?

6. The personality of the photographer, when he was young, his hair and beard, away a lot of the time, the absent father, his relationship with his wife, her commitment to his work, cataloguing and preserving?

7. His son, missing his father, as a grown-up, the possibility of accompanying his father? His father’s advice, his comments about framing a picture and giving it life? The results?

8. The opening with the Brazilian miners, the commentary about the mine, gold, the difficulties? The trip across South America, 10 years, the variety of people, the different countries? The sequences in West Park were? The important ethnography of the Brazilian tribes, the wood in their chins, unsophisticated, yet becoming involved in a century in a sophisticated world?

9. Inventors, behind the camera, his appearance, the interview?

10. The career decision of the photographer, his commitment, his alertness to people, their lives, ordinariness, grief? The images of the director on screen, his interview? A good man, the Institute, his wife and experience?

11. Strongly humanitarian film?

PRISONER OF WAR

US, 1954, 80 minutes, black and white.
Ronald Reagan, Steve Forrest, Dewey Martin, Oscar Homoljka, Robert Horton, Paul Stewart, Harry Morgan, Daryl Hickman, John Lupton, Jerry Paris.
Directed by Andrew Marton.

Prisoner of War is of historical interest. It was made at the end of the Korean War, still capitalising on animosity of the United States towards North Korea towards China. It also focuses on the plight of prisoners of war, discovering how much brainwashing techniques were used on them – as seen in some films like The Rack and, more importantly, The Manchurian Candidate. There is much talk of breaking points and referring to Pavlov’s responses and control.

In retrospect, it is interesting to see the attitude towards North Korea in the mid 1950s, continuing on throughout the decades and well into the 21st century. The film highlights the isolation of North Korea and its communist ethos, and the assistance of Russian advisers during the war.

And, also in retrospect, the film is interesting because of its star, Ronald Reagan, taking a strong stance in an anti-Communist film, at the time of the blacklisting and the Mc Carthy hearings, a quarter of a century before he became president. Some of his lines sound like the lines he used as President in the 1980s.

He was always a sturdy, often genial presence in films, especially in the 1930s and early 1940s at Warner Brothers. He plays an officer, asked to volunteer to parachute into Korea, join the prisoners of war, discover how the prisoners were treated, brainwashing techniques, and find ways of sending the information to America.

Steve Forrest portrays a very staunch pro—American, willing even to die for his beliefs with no concessions to the enemy. He also kills the Russian adviser, played by Oscar Homolka, who insinuates himself into the mentality of the Koreans as well as the Americans. There is a comic touch with his assistant who always answers his observations and commands with, “Yes, indeed”.

The character played by Dewey Martin is particularly interesting, a young man who seems to be at ease and accepting the blandishments of the Russians, for more food, for being in charge of the soldiers, the being the go-between the Korean authorities and the Russians with the soldiers. He is looked on by most, but others make concession for his inexperience and young age. It is a surprise the soldiers – and the audiences well – to find that he has been on the same undercover mission as Ronald Reagan, ingratiate himself, discovering information, communicating it back home.

The Ronald Reagan character also has to find ways to accommodate with the authorities and to get the use of means to get messages back to the United States. Martin had written letters home. He is filmed, as is Reagan and the audience sees the American authorities, led by Harry Morgan, in interpreting the information.

There are some scenes of cruelty, of one officer with his arms over a bar and his hands weighed down by stones with the authorities dragging on them. When the soldiers riot and destroy the film, they are all put into graves and left exposed until the day sign a document saying that they were not tortured. They are lined up to be shot. And Steve Forrest, the leader, is put on the hill with a kind of crucifixion.

The film was directed by Andrew Marton, himself from Hungary, migrating to the US at the outbreak of World War II. He made a number of films in different genres but is best known for his Second Unit work on Ben Hur and the chariot race.

This kind of history seems very remote in the 21st century, but it is an interesting example of propaganda, the dramatisation of American attitudes, especially towards North Korea.

WALLANDER: FORSVUNNEN/ MISSING/THE DISAPPEARED

Sweden, 2009, 90 minutes, Colour.
Krister Henriksson, Charlotta Jonsson, Douglas Johansson, Matts Bergman, Fredrik Gunnarsson, Malena Engstrom, Gustaf Hammarsten.
Directed by Leif Magnusson.

In the Swedish version of Wallander, Krister Henriksson plays Wallander in twenty-six episodes, the first in 2005, the second in 2009/10. He is a contrast with Kenneth Branagh who portrayed Wallander in six British/Swedish telemovies.

The Swedish film is much more ordinary in its presentation of police work in Sweden, contrasting with the Branagh version where he is a tortured soul and the film focuses on his own personal crises, relationship with his father and his daughter, his anguishing over his work and its implications.

Wallander seems a much more ordinary person in this film, laughing a great deal more than does his Branagh counterpart. The team is there working with him as well.

The films are interesting police stories in themselves, as well as Swedish interpretations of the novels by Henning Mankell.

1. Audience interest in the novels of Henning Mankell? The film versions? British? Swedish?

2. The conventions of the police investigation? In the Swedish setting? Police precincts, task forces, investigations?

3. The Swedish settings, the town, homes, shops, the woods? the musical score?

4. The character of Wallander, audience familiarity, his age, experience, skill in police work? His divorce? His daughter working in the office, sharing in
the investigations? His return from suspension? The collaboration with the other officers? The secretary, seeming to ignore him, giving him the bun? The authorities and putting him back into investigations?

5. The basic situation? The Latin American husband, delivering the daughter, the wife and her antagonism, the little girl going to school, riding the bike, getting off, going into the woods, with the sweet from Victor? The bike thrown into the lake, the search for it and finding it? The girl’s disappearance?

6. Suspicions of the father, the divorce, his wanting sole custody, his wife’s opposition? His cousin, the house and the search? The husband and his plan to go to Chile with his daughter? The tickets?

7. Victor, his shop, greeting the girls? His later help in finding the girls? The revelation of his relationship with Helen? Her visits? Her death?

8. Helen, the daughters, her husband, the divorce, custody issues? Her saying she did not hear the phone, her being with the Victor? Participating in the search? Discovered dead?

9. Wallander and his insights? The case some years earlier, going to see the mother, her bitterness towards him because of his accusations? Her being freed? Allegations that she had tortured her daughter? Her participating in the search? The issue of the teeth and the bites?

10. The police, suspicions of the woman, wanting to arrest her, the interrogations? Her having a list of paedophiles? Her attack on the cook – and Wallander interviewing him, praising him for his settling down, rehabilitation? His advice about the abduction?

11. Linda, in the house, taken by Victor, bound and put in plastic? The noise for help? Her father finding her, rescuing her?

12. Victor, his abducting the girl years earlier, keeping her in the cellar, her being discovered, her health, reunited with her mother, coming home?

13. The little girl being found, her fear, running away?

14. Confronting Victor, is slashing his throat?

15. More straightforward crime story? The investigation? The perpetrator?

BLACK ICE

Finland, 2007, 110 minutes, Colour.
Outi Maenpaa, Ria Kataja, Martti Suosalo.
Directed by Petri Kotwica.

Black Ice is a domestic drama from Finland. On her 40th birthday, Sarah realises that her husband has been having an affair and decides to follow the woman in question, one of her husband’s students. When she discovers that the girl also trains in martial arts, she joins her course and continues, becoming much more friendly with the young woman herself.

The husband, it is revealed, has been philandering all his life. His wife moves out but when he says that he has changed his affections, she moves back home. In the meantime, she has become very friendly with the young woman, her confidante, sharing her experiences.

There is violence in the conclusion, a death, but the young woman is pregnant and Sarah, who is a doctor, help save her child.

The ending is not all clear and exact, the audience pondering what will happen to the characters after the closing credits…

1. A domestic drama, conflict, Scandinavian style? Finland?

2. The setting in Finland, homes, hospitals, gymnasiums? The countryside? The musical score?

3. The title, real, symbolic?

4. The introduction to the plot, Leo and his having affair with Julie, his being late for the birthday party, Sarah and her turning 40, the guests arriving, the incident with the condoms, the tension in the party, the aftermath, Sarah accusing Leo of his affair?

5. Leo, his age, with the student, her project, his guitar, the news that he had been philandering all his life? Sarah walking out, his reaction, his meetings with Julie? Her being in the house, has pursuing her in the car, his crash, his death?

6. Sarah, following Julie, at the gymnasium, her training for the martial arts, her continually returning, becoming friends with Julie, her motivation, attitude towards Leo, still loving him, the meetings with him, moving out and then returning? Her attitudes towards Julie, some revenge, yet liking the girl, continuing at the course, the discovery of the pregnancy?

7. Julie, ordinary, student, her design, martial arts, the relationship with Leo, talking to Sarah, some hesitation but saying she loved Leo? Her wanting Sarah to accompany her to functions? Her pregnancy, coming to the home, realising that Sarah was Leo’s wife? Her driving away?

8. Sarah, her work in hospital, telling Julie she was a psychologist, finding Julie to be a patient, the pregnancy, saving the child? Bond between her and Julie?

9. The presentation of the characters, their internal attitudes, their behaviour? The complexities?

THE MAN FROM DOWN UNDER


US, 1943, 103 minutes, Black and white.
Charles Laughton, Binnie Barnes, Richard Carlson, Donna Reed, Horace Mc Nally, Arthur Shields.
Directed by Robert Z. Leonard.

The Man from Down Under indicates an Australian. And this time he is played by Charles Laughton. The film is rather oddball, especially frustrating audiences, listening to the variety of English-derived accents, some with a little American twang. However, there is plenty of Australian slang, some at times overloading the dialogue.

The film is part of the MGM war effort, a story about Australian allies, respect for their contribution to the war effort, especially after the bombing of Pearl Harbor and the bombing of Darwin and northern Australia. The film was released, more or less, at the time of the Battle of Guadalcanal.

The film opens with World War I, the Australians going home, pretty noisy and drinking in France, Jocko Wilson, Charles Laughton, about to return but involving himself with some of the children, some orphans, and agreeing to smuggle them back to Australia. The Australian action takes place in the 1920s and 30s, especially in a Melbourne pub, Jocko training Nipper (Richard Carlson) who becomes a significant boxer, competing for the Empire title. In the meantime, the other orphan, Mary (Donna Reed) has been away at boarding school and returns just at the time of the fight.

The film has a rather unusual subtext for the period, potential incest, the two orphans considered brother and sister, although the audience knows from the outset that in fact they are not blood relations. But this causes a lot of tension, Mary courted by a journalist, Horace Mc Nally, and Nipper realising his feelings for his sister.

The film has an unexpected Catholic tone, the sequence in France where the friend of the father of the orphans gives the abbe some relics for the children. He is very sympathetic as he runs the orphanage. In Australia, there is a rather large ecclesiastical establishment near the hotel in North Queensland, with the clerics in soutanes, which looks something like a seminary. One of the priests, Father Polycarp (Arthur Shields, brother of Barry FitzGerald?, who also appeared as a priest in Scandal at Scourie) is a friend at the hotel, is able to massage for Nipper and his injured shoulder, but also as a confidant, and the spiritual guide for Nipper in his personal worries. It is Father Polycarp who, at the end, provides the information that they are not brother and sister.

Also in the cast is Binnie Barnes as a club dancer who is stood up by Jocko at the church but who comes to Australia in disguise, twice widowed, who has sold the hotel to Jocko but gets it back because of his constant gambling and IOUs.

The film was directed by Robert Z Leonard, a veteran of many MGM films, including Pride and Prejudice.

1. The film of the MGM war effort? An entertainment? Propaganda? Against the Japanese?

2. The film in production soon after the attack on Pearl Harbor? The bombing attacks on Australia? Drawing on this history? The use of newsreel footage?

3. The American tribute to the Australian war effort, Australia as ally of the United States?

4. The French World War I settings, the transition to Australia, the city, in the pub, to North Queensland, the countryside, the hotel? The musical score?

5. An American version of Australia? Australian characters? The variable accents? The slang and Australian phrases? Credible for the world audience?
For Australian audiences?

6. The title, the emphasis for Australia?

7. France, the end of World War I, troops going home, the Australians, rowdy, Jocko in the group, his leadership, with the orphans, the children fighting, boxing, his liking the two children, their reliance on him, arranging for Ginger to smuggle them onto the boat?

8. Jocko and Aggie, the singing, the past, tough, confronting Jocko, his proposal, the money for the trousseau, calling it torso, his being picked up for rowdiness, Aggie waiting at the church, his going on board, behind bars?

9. Jocko in Australia, with Ginger, buying the pub, the clientele, rowdy, boxing? His training Nipper, Nipper growing up, his fighting skills, the build-up to the Empire championship? Everybody betting, for and against? Jocko and the risks?

10. Mary, returning from boarding school, growing up? The family reunion? At the station, the meeting Dusty, the attraction, the attraction to Nipper?

11. The fight, Nipper and his perseverance, winning? Rejoicing? Yet Nipper, the damage to his shoulder? His shruggin it off? Jocko knowing the truth?

12. The decision to buy the hotel, setting up the resort, North Queensland? No guests? The arrival of Aggie, her assistant, being a widow, having bought the hotel? The attraction to Jocko, getting revenge, the card games, his IOUs, her finally taking over? His staying as manager?

13. Life at the resort, Ginger and his work? Father Polycarp? Genial presence, wise advice? The neighbouring seminary?

14. Dusty and his visit, attraction to Mary, the proposal, The fighting him? His later apology? Going to the monastery, talking with Father Polycarp? His attraction towards Mary? Feeling that he should have to go away, no explanations? Jocko thinking he was a coward?

15. The war, the attack on North Queensland, Jocko and Ginger signing up, Jocko and the rejection, his doing labouring work? Finally arriving back in North Queensland? His wanting to get to the hotel, the crash and finding, freeing him?

16. The women, the war effort, nursing, the children, having to evacuate? The clerics helping? The Japanese crash? The soldiers escaping, threatening, Jocko and their fighting them?

17. Father Polycarp, the news of the background of the two children, Mary and her dream with Nipper absent, the documents, the medals given by the friend to the day in France?

18. Jocko and Aggie, Ginger and his work, Mary and Nipper together?

19. A different kind of war effort film?

ELSA AND FRED

US, 2014, 103 minutes, Colour.
Shirley Mac Laine, Christopher Plummer, Marcia Gay Harden, Scott Bakula, Chris Noth, George Segal, James Brolin, Erika Alexander, Wendell Pierce, Reg Rogers.
Directed by Michael Radford.


With Hollywood’s perspective on film-making, that box office receipts come from younger audiences, there are not too many films made for older audiences. The Best Exotic Marigold Hotel and its sequel, as well as a number of films featuring Maggie Smith new detention, are reminders that grey-haired or silver-haired (and some with the touch of dye!) enjoy a film outing. Elsa and Fred certainly fits the bill.

While it was being film, Shirley Mac Laine was 79 and Christopher Plummer 84. Also in the cast was a younger George Segal, only 81 James Brolin a mere 73.

This is a remake of an Argentinian film of the same name, from 2005, and is directed by Michael Radford, British director who has filmed all over the world, Africa for White Mischief, Chile for Il Postino, and who also directed The Merchant of Venice with Al Pacino.

Christopher Plummer is Fred, getting too old to live alone and manage himself but resenting that he has to go into a unit. His daughter, played by Marcia Gay Harden, fusses about and his son-in-law would like a loan to float a business deal. Fred is something of a curmudgeon, not prone to looking happy. And he is unimpressed by the fact that they have employed a carer for him.

Elsa lives across the way, and in her behaviour and attitudes, chatting and laughing, she resembles the Shirley Mac Laine of so many films over the decades. And why not? Audiences have liked her and responded well to her – and, ultimately, so does Fred.

One of Elsa’s idiosyncrasies is her love for Fellini’s film La Dolce Vita, especially the Trevi fountain scene with Anita Ekberg going into the water, watched by Marcello Mastroianni. Elsa has a poster on the wall and watches the film over and over. And she has a dream that one day she will go to Rome, dress up like Anita Ekberg and re-enact the famous scene.

Fred has no such dreams and finds Elsa a little irritating, though he kindly believes some of her wild stories, especially when she pleads and describes needy family so that he will give her back the cheque to pay for the damage she did to his daughter’s car. Truth is not her forte and we discover throughout the film that she has told some little white lies as well as whoppers. But she takes a shine to Fred, trying to persuade him to take a little step by step and move outside his room.

She does and gradually Fred comes to life, though his goodwill is sorely tested by Elsa, her behaviour, and her playing with the truth.

But, this is a feel-good film for the older audience and, despite ups and downs, moments of love, moments of exasperation, Elsa and Fred offers an affirmation of life and its possibilities.

1. The appeal? The stars? Their age, characters – and romance?

2. The film originally Argentinian, adapting the original to New Orleans, the city, the streets, the streetcars, apartments, the park, flash restaurants? The interiors of the apartment block? The musical score?

3. The motif of La Dolce Vita, film, the Trevi fountain, and Anita Ekberg, Marcello Mastroianni, the spirit of the film, of the scene, Elsa watching it, the poster in her apartment? Elsa’s dream to relive the scene in Rome?

4. Frank, Lydia, her husband, her son, moving Fred, Elsa curious, bumping into the car, driving off, denying any accident, her face and noises at the young boy to stop him talking? His still telling his parents? The impact, accosting Elsa, her son, giving her a cheque, her sob story to Fred, Fred believing it, pity, for the ailing child? Yet Elsa using the cheque the artist’s son?

5. Shirley Mac Laine as Elsa, exuberant, her Mastroianni performances, the touch of the outrageous, her telling fanciful stories, people believing them, she believing them? Her son, careful, his job, married three times, his children? The artist son and the contrast? The money for the show, his painting, the show and his exhibits? Response to his paintings? Elsa and Fred at the opening? Elsa’s as a widow, and yet not? Saying her husband had an affair, but not? Her talk, charm? Interest in Fred, the attraction, visiting his apartment, his lying down, not wanting to go out? Her philosophy of taking little steps? Going to the park, the bill at the restaurant, enjoying it, the prices and their running away, driving off? Going to the party for the grandchild, Fred discovering the truth, the arrival of Elsa’s husband, the husband coming to visit Fred and telling him the true story? Fred following her, the dialysis?

6. Christopher Plummer as Fred, a touch of the curmudgeon, wanting to be by himself, moving into the apartment, the woman hired to look after him, his reaction to her? Discussions with his daughter, her visits, her husband of the plea for the loan, Fred’s comments about his gadget – rather useless? Saying yes to the loan, then changing his mind? Elsa and the cheque, his allowing her to have it, the talk, her stories, his believing them, in his apartment, the small steps, persuaded to go out, dressing up, the meal, the running away, the walk, the discussions with his grandson?

7. Fred and the visit from George, the doctor, the role of friendship, talking together, his influence?

8. Elsa’s son, his care for her, the three wives? The party? The contrast with the artist son?

9. The woman, the hired help, Fred not wanting her, the Super, being busy, Elsa arranging that the young woman should help the Super?

10. Elsa’s lies, believing or not, wanting trust from Fred? Fred following her, discovering her illness?

11. The decision to go to Rome, the touristic sequences, the night, Elsa dressing as Anita Ekberg, her age and look, the wig, the dress, getting Fred to buy the milk for the cat as in the film, his only getting yoghurt? The re-creation of the scene, Elsa in the fountain, Fred in the fountain, the glamour, the exuberance, the delight and the fulfilment of her dream?

12. Fred, the aftermath, sadness at Elsa’s death, his getting a new lease of life, change and future?

PIONEER

Norway, 2013, 111 minutes, Colour.
Aksel Hendy, Wes Bentley, Stephen Lang, Stephanie Sigman, Jonathan La Paglia, Jorgen Langhelle, Andre Eriksen.
Directed by Erik Skjoldbjaerg.


Pioneer is a Norwegian film, set in the 1970s and 1980s with exploration for oil in North Sea, and the discoveries enriching Norway. The focus of the film is the exploration of the sea bed as well as the development of the technology which would allow the oil to be transferred through pipes in the depths of the sea to land.

The film shows some Norwegian experts and their developing the capacity to operate at depths, processes for breathing and maintaining functioning under extreme pressure. When there is a death, there are investigations, and cover-ups and payoffs.

The main character is an expert and is upset at the death, the death of his brother. He begins to challenge the authorities, the Americans wanting cover up and the Norwegians wanting to maintain a strong national presence.

The Norwegians have to work with the Americans and several American actors, Stephen Lang, Wes Bentley, and Australian Jonathan la Paglia, appear in the film.

1. Norwegian film? Norwegian performers? The American element, American performers? The two different languages? International perspective?

2. The film and its stands in favour of Norway, oil discoveries, the need for technology, the piping of the loyal, wealth for Norway? Americans, know-how, the contract? Norwegians anti-Americans? The deals? The Postscript and the Norwegians suing for neurological damage?

3. Thriller, the situation, North Sea oil, the diving, the testing, the attempts at fixing the pipe, the failure, the gases? American control, the bosses, Michael, the doctor? The decisions about going down? Deaths? Investigations, cover-ups, ambiguous characters? The truth?

4. The picture of the sea, homes, laboratories, offices, the walks, boats? The interior of the plant? The deep sea diving? The simulations? The musical score?

5. The explanations, the 1970s, the need for contracts, urgency, political leaders, law experts, the Americans and tough stances? Mike, Ronald, Leif, Jorgan, the various jobs? Knut and his going down? The details of the test, the pressures? The effect on the men? Going down to fix the pipes, the gas, its being cut, can its death?

6. Petter, the focus, his expertise, Knut as his brother, the visits with Maria, the son, the family, pleasant outings?

7. The international dimensions, Communications, lies? Petter getting out, the confrontation, going to see Jorgan, his fit, Jorgan taking the blame? Leif and his information, the gases? Leif’s death? Ronald, the explanation of the gas, the anaesthetics, his demonstration about pressure with the mice? Petter driving, Mike and his pursuit, the crash?

8. The Norwegians, the laboratories, the bosses, the lawyer, the hopes for Norwegian participation?

9. The build-up to the next test, Petter being rejected? The Norwegians standing by him? The experience, the cylinder with the gas, his hiding it in Knut’s locker? The discussions with the woman scientist, not trusting her? The empty valve?

10. His going to the boat, Jorgan visiting, Petter overboard, the explosion and Jorgan’s death?

11. Maria, her grief, given the money by the Americans, the TV interview and the leader challenged about buying people off?

12. Petter, taking the check, giving it back? The discussions about the truth?

13. The Norwegian authorities, Petter going back to work? The achievement?

WHO AM I - KEIN SYSTEM IST SICHER

Germany, 2014, 103 minutes, Colour.
Tom Schilling, Elyas M' Barek, Wotan Wilke Mohring, Antoine Monot Jr, Trine Dyrholm.
Directed by Baran bo Odar.

WHO AM I (on screen and thematically correct as WHOAMI) is a contemporary German film, an interpretation of the phenomenon of hacking in the 21st century. It has been made by film-makers in their 20s and 30s, produced for that age group and its response, especially knowledge of Internet technology and hacking skills, a thriller for a technological age.

The film as well and persuasively made, carrying the audience along with its characters and plot, with the addition of a constant throbbing beat score.

The film opens dramatically with the central character, Benjamin (Tom Schilling) discovering his friends dead and his giving himself up to the government and submitting to an interrogation. This is conducted by Hannah, a government official, played by the Danish actress Trine Dyrhom. Benjamin seems something of a pathetic young man, bowed and somewhat distraught as he begins to answer the questions. What has happened to him is presented in vivid flashbacks.

Benjamin was considered invisible when he was at school, thought of as a freak, which meant that he spent a lot of his time in his room, a computer-nerd, but developing skills for hacking, which are tested when he infiltrates the University exam site on behalf of Marie, whom he has always liked, but has ignored him.

He also explains how he came into contact with three men, also skilled in computer technology, who are impressed by his work and taking him on as part of their team. They are particularly interested in an anonymous virtual person, MRX, who is visualised in a virtual room, masked, with his dialogue printed out in box form. The group try some hacking and Benjamin is successful, wanting to prove himself to his friends, and adopting some of their lifestyle, drinking and the use of cocaine.

When they become more adventurous, they decide to go physically into a government building, penetrate its technology rooms and files and steal information. Benjamin stays back and discovers more information which he does not tell the others about. There are all kinds of repercussions when a hacker is murdered in the woods and is revealed as a government agent. Then Russian government is involved, perhaps MRX being an agent for them.

Benjamin becomes even more daring, infiltrating buildings in The Hague while the conference is going on, only to return back to the apartment which we saw at the beginning with his friends murdered.

At this stage of a review, the reviewer can only say that there are quite a number of twists in the final part of the film, giving more depth to the title of the film, playing with the character of Benjamin and what is going on in his mind and the response to him by his interrogator.

Younger audiences will probably relish this thriller and its dramatisation of hacking. A similar film, Blackhat, directed by Michael Mann, did not have the good reviews expected nor the distribution expected, it being considered, perhaps, too intricate and involved for mainstream audiences. This may be the case with Who Am I, but it is fast-paced and intriguing.

1. The title, WHOAMI, hackers and hacking, secrecy, identities and codenames? The twists on the meaning of Who Am I?

2. The Berlin setting, the city, the views, homes, the University, the streets, clubs? The throbbing beat score?

3. Issues of hacking in the 20th century, 21st century, the sophistication of the hackers, young in age, knowledge of computers, their skills, targets, issues of privacy, hacking into government sites, international?

4. Codenames, the meanings, for individuals, for groups, the teams?

5. Benjamin, young, the opening and his finding his dead colleagues, surrendering to the government? The interrogation, his story? The insertion of the flashbacks?

6. Hanna, in charge of the interrogation, her attitude, listening, the questions, her own situation, the authorities, wanting to suspend her, the need for her to resolve the situation, maintain her job? Working with her colleagues?

7. Benjamin and his story, as a young boy, his mother and her illness, his saying he was invisible, thought of as a freak? His attitude towards Marie, her not noticing him? At home, his room, his computer, hacking, his name, the supervising doctor him? Marie and her request, his hacking successfully the exam questions? Talking with Marie, her boyfriend and his clashing and attacks?

8. The encounter with Max, Max as a type? Paul and Stephen and their particular skills? As a team, Benjamin wanting to prove himself? The character of MRX, the character appearing in virtual rooms, masked face, images, captioned dialogue?

9. Benjamin’s life, with his friends, the drinking, the cocaine, the effect? Benjamin still wanting to prove himself to himself, to Marie?

10. The hacking, the success, the admiration of his friends?

11. Going online, MRX, the reported death of Krypton? The international repercussions?

12. The mystery, the decision to go into the government offices, the masks, the ability to get inside, codes and doors, downloading the material? Benjamin
staying back, noticing more information, the memory stick? The repercussions, especially internationally, with Russia, governments, and MRX?

13. The information about Russia, the scenes in the virtual rooms?

14. The visit to The Hague, international issues, Benjamin and his getting into the building, saying that he had lost his wallet, persuading the guard, setting up the connection under the table?

15. Finding his colleagues dead, his reaction?

16. The interview with Hannah, his admitting a lot of the truth? His hacking and finding the young man in New York City as MRX? True or Benjamin setting him up?

17. Hannah and her solving the case, willing to let him go? His request for witness protection? His mental state, the interview with the doctor about the issues of schizophrenia, multiple personality, his mother, his saying he did not want to be like his mother?

18. The symbolism of the picture, the mirror and its reflecting Benjamin’s back rather than his face?

19. His being let go, on the boat, dyeing his hair, with his three friends, alive, with Marie?

20. His setting up the fictitious story and all of them escaping? How real? How much in his mind?

THE LAST OUTLAW

US, 1993, 90 minutes, Colour.
Mickey Rourke, Dermot Mulroney, John C. Mc Ginley, Danny Quinn, Steve Buscemi, Ted Levene, Keith David, Gavin O’ Herlihy.
Directed by Geoff Murphy.


The Last Outlaw is a 1990s Western, a perspective on the post Civil War era, with the themes and language of the 20th century. The film has bit been directed by Geoff Murphy, New Zealand director, who went to Hollywood.

The film focuses on a group of Southern soldiers who do not accept the end of the war and go on rampages throughout the West, robbing banks. The leader is played by Mickey Rourke, a bitter man, ruthless in his robberies, and in his treatment of his men, shooting the wounded. This leads to revolt against him by Eustis (Dermot Mulroney) who is beginning to understand the bitterness and ruthlessness.

The leader is shot and is found by the town posse in pursuit, led by vengeful Sheriff, Gavin O’ Herlihy, and the owner of the bank. The leader wants his revenge and leads the posse, speculating on their route to the Rio Grande. The posse squabble amongst themselves, especially about the reward which leads to an internal shootout. The leader also causes the death of each of the members of his former gang, with the final confrontation with Eustis.

The film has very strong cast of character actors.

1. 1990s take on the American West? Post Civil War? The developing towns, bank robberies, continued hostilities between South and North?

2. The settings, the town, the desert, the mountains, the Rio Grande? The musical score?

3. The explanations, the Civil War, the aftermath, the settling of the towns, establishing the banks? The citizens of the town, sheriff, trigger-happy people? The Southerners, refusing to admit defeat, in posses, robberies?

4. Graff, the leader, Mickey Rourke, his bitterness, leadership, his hold over the men, their coming to understand him, following him for the robbery, yet
discontent, his recklessness with people’s lives, ruthless killings, the men turning against him? Shooting? Eustis and his becoming disillusioned, the shooting?, The posse capturing him, his shrewdness, doing the deal, leading them, the angry sheriff wanting to kill him, the banker wanting his money? Graff anticipating the directions the others would go, the gradual shooting of his gang, the squabbles amongst the posse, shooting each other, Graff with money, the banker, his tossing it over the cliff, pushing the banker? Graff and his intentions, revenge, the deal with Lovecraft and his killing himself? Shooting Potts? Wills, his staying and the shootout, his death? Eustis and Potts crossing the Rio Grande, Potts being shot?

5. Eustis, his voiceover and comment, his answering and confronting Graff, his comment on what was happening,, Graff and his leadership, his being
disillusioned when Graff left the young man to die, shooting him? Becoming the leader, the rest of the group, the characters, interactions, dying one by one? The final confrontation with Graff, Graff aiming at him, taking his gun, but Eustis having the pistol and shooting Graff? Eustis and his character, with the gang, change of heart, future?

6. The posse, the sheriff, vindictive, the men growling amongst themselves, the issues of the money, with the banker, continuing after the shootout?

7. Graff and his group, the different characters, their personalities, participating in the robbery, the escape, the pursuit? Reaction to Graff, staying with Eustis? The gradual deaths, the shooting of the horses, Wills and his staying, the shootout and his courage and death? Lovecraft and the deal, shooting himself? Potts, the squabbles, yet flexible, his death?

8. A grim picture of the American West, the viewpoint of the 1990s?