THE GIVER

US, 2014, 97 minutes, Colour.
Jeff Bridges, Meryl Streep, Brenton Thwaites, Alexander Skarsgaard, Katie Holmes, Odeya Rush, Cameron Monaghan, Taylor Swift.
Directed by Phillip Noyce.

The Giver is based on the Young Adult novel by Lois Lowry. Filmgoers, especially young filmgoers, will recognise the links with such films as The Hunger Games as well as Divergent although The Giver was published in 1993. In fact, The Giver begins in a very similar way to Divergent but moves to calmer and more peaceful solutions to the crises in the society and community rather than the violence of Hunger Games or Divergent’s martial training.

One of the immediate characteristics of the film is that much of it is in black and white rather than colour. Audiences are informed that this is a future society where equality and sameness are valued, that there are rules to foster the sameness, so black and white is an obvious visual leveller. No standout colour differences (which is also seen in the layout of the suburban area of the community where all houses are exactly the same). This isolated would-be Utopia is situated on a high rocky outcrop, making the moving out of the community difficult even if it were desired. There is a distant boundary which keeps people in. Not that the community wants to go out. This is very peaceful community, living in harmony, everyone following the rules, peace, happiness and friendship.

We are introduced to three friends who are about to graduate and move into adult tasks: Jonas, Asher and Fiona. At their graduation ceremony, The Chief Elder allots a place in the community to each of the teenagers, child nurturing, upholding the law, drone pilots... But, Jonas is not called in his turn and waits to the end where he is allotted a special role, working with The Giver, who retains all the memories of the past which have been obliterated from the members of the community. The Giver’s role is to advise the council of Elders.

The audience has noticed that Jonas has already had a glimpse of colour. When he works with The Giver, the older man holding on to the young man’s arms, transmitting memories – of people and events outside the community, all in colour. Jonas begins to appear in colour himself, and his perceptions of the community become coloured while all the rest are still conformed in their black and white.

As one will anticipate, there will come a time (perhaps this was The Giver’s intention), that Jonas would leave the community and break through the boundary.

The film has a strong cast. Australian Brenton Thwaites (the prince in Maleficient) is effective as Jonas. The Giver himself is played by a somewhat grizzled Jeff Bridges. And, perhaps surprisingly, the community is ruled over by The Chief Elder, who is Meryl Streep, presented in the most unglamorous way, the touch of the hag. Jonas parents (adoptive) are played by Alexander Skarsgaard whose work is in the nurturing of the planned babies and the mother, severe and an ally of The Chief Elder, is played by Katie Holmes. The director is Australian Phillip Noyce, director of Newsfront, Rabbit Proof Fence as well as such American action dramas as Patriot Games, Salt.

Unlike so many other films of this kind, the running time is very short, around 100 minutes. So, in some senses it seems like a short story rather than an epic like The Hunger Games. Obviously, it is a values-oriented film, a story that is against forced conformism in society or family, where the value is freedom of choice, self-determination, and contradicting the opinion of The Chief Elder who is against freedom of choice because humans are prone to make the wrong choices.

1. Young Adult novel brought to the screen? For the target audience? For adults? Parallels with The Hunger Games and Divergent?

2. A futuristic Utopia, on the rock tableland, isolated? The emphasis on equality, all the houses looking the same? No differences? The valuing of sameness and conformism? The delineation of the rules, and the precision of language, apologies, and accepting of apologies, telling lies?

3. The black-and-white photography, its effect, emphasising sameness? Jonas’s glimpses of colour? The changes, the pervading colour, gradual, with characters, situations, with the memories, emphasising differences? The bright coloured scenery, the insertion of footage from such films as Baraka, Samsara? The contrast with the black-and-white? The breaking of the boundary and the transformation of everything into colour? The musical score?

4. Jonas, Asher, Fiona, age, bike riding, the graduation day? The place in their families? Artificial families, babies from the care centre? The observance of the rules inside the house? The mother and her strictness? Father strict but more open? The friendship – the latter consequences?

5. The Graduation ceremony, in black and white, the Chief Elder appearing in hologram, her words, charm and humour, encouraging of the younger graduates and their getting their bikes? Each of the graduates being allotted their task, according to their aptitudes, the range of tasks, nurturing, flying drones, issues of authority? The Chief Elder thanking every one for their childhood? Jonas and his not being chosen, until the end, the special task, the surprise? His being entrusted to The Giver? To be a repository of the memories of the past, all of which had been obliterated from the memories of the citizens? His being bound to secrecy?

6. The Chief Elder and Meryl Streep’s presence and performance? Appearance? Coming to the ceremony? Presiding at the meeting of the elders? Charm yet severity? The Giver and his presence of the graduation, looking round at Jonas?

7. The daily routine for the citizens, the initial injection, no memories, building the new?

8. Jonas and his going to the house of The Giver, discovering the library, the explanation of books, his looking at them? The house on the cliff? The Giver, age, personality, the story of his failure, the revelation that it was his daughter, Rosemary, and the memories of her playing the piano and refusal to go on? Different rules, the ability to lie? Jonas and his eagerness, sitting with The Giver, the holding hands for the memories of the sled, riding, the colour? Jonas returning the visits, the elephant hunting and shooting the elephant and his being upset, leaving? Eventually coming back, the war sequences and the shooting? The nature scenes from Baraka, Samsara? The effect, its becoming full of colour? At home, secrecy, the reactions of Father, of Mother, the little sister and his talking with her? Gabriel, holding Gabriel’s hand, absorbing memories? Seeing Fiona, his feelings for her? The Giver and his explanation of love?

9. The babies, the nursery, the cribs, Father and his naming the baby Gabriel, against the rules, but to give it more care? Gabriel as the new Receiver, going home, care, smiles, the sister and her care for Gabriel?

10. The Giver, his concerns and plans, the interrogation by the Chief Elder, her warnings? Screens, surveillance – the capacity for replaying secret conversations?

11. The Giver and his continued communication to Jonas, the time, Jonas seeing the Giver and Rosemary, the piano? The motivations for passing all this information to Jonas?

12. Jonas, the decision to leave, to take Gabriel, getting Fiona to be a decoy with the false crib? Riding his bike, getting to the cliff, going over the cliff, Asher and the conversation with The Chief Elder, magnetising Jonas to the drone, dropping him into the falls, Jonas and the baby, their continued travels, through the desert, the snow and the mountains, the memories, finding the sled, breaking through the boundary, everything becoming coloured?

13. The Chief Elder and her interview with Asher, commanded him to search for Jonas, find him, lose him? Asher and his return, reporting that he had lost Jonas?

14. The change, the community and the pervasiveness of colour, differences?

15. The Giver, sitting with the elders, the meeting, the cameras, watching? The defeat of The Chief Elder?

16. The recovery of memories, freedom of choice, emotions and love, the pessimistic view of The Chief Elder and her belief that people with free choice made wrong choices?

17. Young Adult story of the future, of conformism, of freedom of choice, of initiative and adventure?

GOD’S POCKET

US, 2014, 88 minutes, Colour.
Philip Seymour Hoffman, John Turturro, Richard Jenkins, Christina Hendricks, Caleb Landry Jones, Eddie Marsan.
Directed by John Slattery.

The actual place, God’s Pocket, is not nearly as cosy as the title might suggest. It is a tough-looking location in the city of Philadelphia. The action takes place in the 1980s.

This is a particularly grim film, enabling the audience to peer into the life of a number of families in the area, their personal relationships, their work – with the touch of the criminal – and the violence and cover-ups which are part of the code of God’s Pocket.

It is with regret that we note that it is one of the last films of Philip Seymour Hoffman, a strong performance as always, father and husband, worker, small-time criminal, partly at home in God’s Pocket but reminded, when the chips are down, that he is not a native of the place despite years living there. He is still an outsider.

Christina Hendricks plays his wife. Caleb Landry Jones portrays her son, seemingly sympathetic as he goes off to work on a building site, but a loud-mouth with little respect for anyone, making racist jibes against a black worker. The old man gets a bar and hits the young man, killing him. His mother has a feel that the official report, that the young man was hit by a falling object, is a cover-up and urges her husband to find out. He makes enquiries, eventually does some confronting of the people concerned, but uncovers nothing.

He lists the help of a friend, Arthur (John Turturro) who has a number of connections, but the investigation takes a dour turn when local enmities erupt in violence.

There is some very black humour concerning the hijacking of trucks filled with meat and attempts to sell them to local bars and butchers, and the very mercenary funeral director (Eddie Marsan) refuses to conduct the funeral unless he is paid and puts the body waiting for burial out in the street. Then it is stowed in the truck which is involved in an accident, the corpse going hurtling down a hill…

The film as well acted, and audiences interested in the cast will want to watch it, but most people in real life as well is in the cinema may want to avoid spending time in the grim and glum God’s Pocket.

1. The title, the implications of the title? Audiences discovering it was a place, the working class locale, the irony of the title?

2. Philadelphia, the neighbourhood of God’s Pocket, work, homes, shops, building sites, funeral parlours, bars? Musical score? Real, authentic? God’s Pocket and the residents, isolated, wary of newcomers?

3. The opening, the funeral, introduction to the people, seeing the clashes, the punching of the funeral director, and then the film going back three days?

4. Michael, his marriage, relationship with his wife, her son? Waking for the day, seemingly pleasant, the son going to the building site, the workers, his harshness, his racist comments, the old man hitting him, his death? The workers and the cover story, the accident? The investigation by the police? The reports?

5. Michael, his life, marriage, his friendship with Arturo, his other friends, trucks, the hijackings, the meat, the sales, the clients? Jobs, his wife asking him to get information about her son’s death, asking Arturo, his asking around? The financial situation, needing to pay debts, the truck and the meat? Trying to make a deal with the funeral director, his alleged friendship, obstinacy? Putting the corpse outside the funeral parlour? It’s being put in the truck, falling out on the street? The touches of black comedy?

6. Michael’s wife, her role as wife, mother, home? Her feelings? That her son was murdered? urging Michael, the interviews with the police?

7. Arturo, his age, work, strong-minded wife, her work? The garden? Asked to find out the truth? His debts, his connections, the thugs coming to his house, his wife shooting?

8. The author, as a writer for the paper, his age, his becoming sick of his work, repeating his articles, the talk with the editor? His drinking? Burnt out? His visiting Michael’s wife on the information, and interest in the story, the personal attraction, discussions, the sexual encounter, the effect on the wife – and everybody at the bar knowing about it?

9. The return to the funeral scene, the priest, the ceremony, the clashes, the punches?

10. Michael going to the bar, being welcomed, the past, the customers and their talking, the arrival of the author, his being seen as an outsider, Michael as an outsider, the various stories, the writer not realising what was going to happen, going into the bar, his being besieged by the men, their becoming a mob, bashing him?

11. A slice of life – with more than a pessimistic touch?

FANTASIA 2000

US, 2000, 74 minutes,.Colour.
Steve Martin, Quincy Jones, Bette Midler, James Earl Jones, Penn Jillette, Teler, Angela Lansbury, Kathleen Battle, Ralph Grierson, Itshak Perlman, James Levine.
Directed by James Algar, Gaitan Brizzi, Paul Brizzi, Hendel Butoy, Frances Glebas, Eric Goldberg, Don Hahn, Pixote Hunt.
Disney’s 1940 and tastier Fantasia is considered a classic, an experiment of its period where animators illustrated a variety of classic music, under the direction of the famed Leopold stick asking.Mr Kosky. The range was wide, a number of popular classics including the Nutcracker Sweet, Night on Bald Mountain.

This film might not have been to everybody’s taste, especially music lovers, but it has survived the decadence.

For the millennium, the Disney Studios chose another eight classics and invited animators to illustrate the music. audience response, on the whole, was positive. The only segment repeated was that of The Sorcerers Apprentice, stirring Mickey Mouse. This time Donald Duck gets a brawl role in the animation of Elgar’s Pomp and Circumstances as the biblical Noah’s story.

A number of celebrities were invited to introduce the various segments: Steve Martin, Quincy Jones, Bette Midler, James Earl Jones, Penn Jillette, Teler, Angela Lansbury, This is probably the least effective aspect of the film – most of them are rather superfluous although Bette Midler comes across very well and Angela Lansbury has a very brief appearance.

1. How do you account for the popularity of this film over the decades? Status as a Disney classic? A classic of animation, of musical entertainment for popular audiences? The appropriate combination of both?

2. The title and its implications and meaning? Fantasy? the role of the animation, the invitation to audiences to respond to music, light, colour, design?

3. The importance of the concert format? A frame of mind for audiences to accept the visualisation of music? The style of the introduction to the music, the orchestra tuning up? Taylor and his introduction and explanation - how appropriate? The role of Leopold Stokowski? The vivid impressions of colour? silhouettes? Even Mickey Mouse entering into the impact of the concert? How acceptable for audiences? To make them feel comfortable?

4. The importance of the explanation of the three kinds of music? Story music with plot and pictures? Secondly, music that was just pictures? abstract and pure music? How well were these types illustrated? Appropriately and in good taste? Did the images compare with the music or enhance it? purpose of visualising and its aid for appreciation?

5. The appropriate use of abstracts: movements, colours, patterns? What was the basic response to the sound? To the combination of both? Any insight into the nature of pure and abstract music?

6. The different styles of animation and how they corresponded with the music?
Symphony No. 5 in C minor-I. Allegro con brio, by Ludwig van Beethoven.

Pines of Rome, by Ottorino Respighi.

Rhapsody in Blue, by George Gershwin.

Piano Concerto No. 2 in F Major-I. Allegro, by Dmitri Shostakovich.

The Carnival of the Animals, Finale, by Camille Saint- Saëns.

The Sorcerer's Apprentice, by Paul Dukas.

Pomp and Circumstance – Marches 1, 2, 3 and 4, by Edward Elgar.

Firebird Suite – 1919 Version, by Igor Stravinsky.

7. How effective the introductions (and their personal styles) by the celebrities?
Steve Martin, Quincy Jones, Bette Midler, James Earl Jones, Penn Jillette, Teler, Angela Lansbury.

THE TEXAS CHAINSAW MASSACRE

US, 2003, 98 minutes, Colour.
Jessica Biel, Jonathan Tucker, Erica Leehsen, Mike Vogel, Eric Balfour, Andrew Bryniarski, R.Lee Ermey, David Dorfman, Lauren German.
Directed by Marcus Nispel.

One American reviewer remarked that what the world was really waiting for and needing was a remake of The Texas Chainsaw Massacre! The makers have said that they wanted to reinterpret the classic for contemporary audiences. Box-office success has confirmed their hunch. But, ...

The original was made in 1974 by Tobe Hooper who went on to a career with horror films including Poltergeist and Salem's Lot. It was a small-budget story of five young people encountering a deranged family, especially one adult son who killed people with a chainsaw and covered his deformed face with the skin of his victims. Now, we have the same story with a bigger budget. (There were several sequels to the original and numerous variations on the theme including the 2003 releases the clever, Wrong Turn, and the very ugly House of 1000 Corpses.)

Much of the time can be spent in wondering who would want to see this kind of story and why. As Leatherface pursues his victims and tortures them, we are watching tragic and repellent events. The film-makers say they wanted to make their audiences fearful. This does happen, of course, but it raises the question of why we would want to submit ourselves to this kind of gross horror and fear.

The performances are not bad, especially Jessica Biehl as the intrepid member of the group who runs the gauntlet and survives. Veteran R.Lee Ermy does a variation on his Full Metal Jacket sergeant as the sinister and brutal sheriff.

THE TEXAS CHAINSAW MASSACRE: THE BEGINNING

US, 2006, 91 minutes, Colour.
Jordana Brewster, Taylor Handley, Diora Barid, Matt Bomer, R.Lee Ermey, Andrew Bryiarski
Directed by Jonathan Liebesman.

Who would have thought that a small budget horror movie of the mid-70s which was banned in a number of countries would have led to a minor industry. Not only were there two sequels to Tobe Hooper’s rather horrific but highly influential and imitated film, but there was a remake in 2003 and now this prequel.

The horror genre is a legitimate genre. The question always is about how the horror is imagined and presented: with the gruesome scenes and effects contributing to the film as a whole or presented sensationally, an indulging in blood and gore. And that, of course, varies from person to person, to sensibility to sensibility and depends on audience sensitivities.

This contribution to the Texas Chainsaw franchise tries to do a number of things. First and foremost, it wants to do a variation on the original while keeping close to it. This it does. It also wants to offer some kind of background to the Texas family, the origins of the killer called Leatherface. This it also does in quite some elaborate detail: his birth in 1939 and people’s revulsion, his growing up and working in the abattoirs which gives him all the training he needs to dismember his victims. It moves to 1969 and the closure of the abattoirs for health reasons and the town dying. Leatherface’s family are faced with poverty and hunger – and you can guess the rest, especially when the active member, R.Lee Ermey (reminding audiences all the time of his oppressive sergeant in Full Metal Jacket) assumes the role of local sheriff and pursues victims to the family house, tortures, kills and eats them.

The film also tries to make some social comment on the times, especially patriotism, the past wars and the Vietnam war.

The trouble comes in the ‘how’. The torture scenes are very grim and blood-drenched. Do they keep within boundaries or not? Fans of the genre will say it is all OK. Others will not want to see it at all.

DISCONNECT

US, 2012, 115 minutes, Colour.
Jason Bateman, Hope Davis, Frank Grillo, Michael Niqvist, Paula Patton, Andrea Riseborough, Alexander Skarsgaard, Max Thieriot, Colin Ford, Jonah Bobo.
Directed by Henry Alex Rubin.
Disconnect does not seem a likely title for a film. However, there it is, and an interesting film to see and think about.

Disconnect is the word that could describe many of the relationships in the film, fathers and sons, husbands and wives, students in school. It could be also interpreted as something of a command, that users of the Internet need to disconnect at times, and that they can be led into difficult and dangerous situations.

The film consists of three stories, not particularly connected except by the theme of the Internet.

The first story concerns an ambitious journalist, Nina (Andrea Riseborough) who becomes interested in sex chat rooms, choosing one young man, Kyle (Max Thieriot), engaging in conversation with him and then tracking him down to ask him would he do a television interview about his life and work. Eventually he agrees and the interview goes ahead. The consequences for the journalist are that she is successful as is her program. The consequences for him is to think about his future and moving on from his sex activities. Complications arise when the young man becomes dependent on the journalist, disturbing her way of life, challenging her to help him. And the FBI becomes interested because of the activities, exploitation, and use of underage models.

It should be said that one of the strengths of the film is that none of the three stories has easy endings, leading to the audience reflecting on the open ended directions of the stories.

The second story concerns identity fraud. a middle-aged couple, Derek (Alexander Skarsgaard) and Cindy (Paula Patton) are grieving at the death of the little child which has led to some alienation between the couple, he a former marine caught up in his work and travel, with a touch of gambling, she left alone at home and resorting to chat rooms for sympathetic and heartfelt revelations about her life. This time, someone uses information from the chat rooms to empty their bank accounts. The police are swamped and have little time for so many of these identity theft cases. The couple hire a private detective who is able to help them, who even tracks down a connection (Michael Niqvist) and they stalk and harass him. It becomes more complicated than they thought, and have to decide whether to pursue the case or accept their losses – but with the opportunity of finding the relationship between them again. (All the chat room conversations are preserved, can be printed out and read – and they are.)

The third story is quite harrowing. Ben (Jonah Bobo) is an extremely introverted young student at school, with a love of music, feeling alienated at home, especially for his from his strict father (Jason Bateman in a serious role). Two young boys ridicule him and decide to text him, pretending to be Jessica, a student at school – with Ben responding very positively, but becoming involved as the boys send explicitly nude photos, the two cyber bullies enjoying their tormenting Ben but never realising that it would lead to his attempted suicide. In the aftermath, one of the boys whose mother has died and whose strict father has brought him up, continues texting with Ben’s father, ultimately leading to a violent confrontation.

While the three stories may be familiar enough, it is the writing and the strong performances which bring them to life and are a challenge to the audience.

A cautionary tale concerning the Internet.
1. A topical subject? The Internet? Bullying? Crime?

2. American story, universal? The American town, homes, school, hospital, situations? The musical score?

3. The title, the links between people being disconnected? Or a command that they ought to disconnect from being online?

4. Three stories, their interconnection? The link with the father and his legal consultation for the television program?

5. Nina’s story: journalist, at home, on the Internet, choosing Kyle, his appearing in the chat room, their talk? His offers? Issues of payment? The suggestion of the interview, the idea of the television, pitching it to the bosses, contacting Kyle, meeting with him, the discussions, the story of his life, wanting to do his job, his choices? Nina and her emphasis on the future? Kyle thinking it over? Doing the interview, the frank talk, his voice and image disguised? The popularity of the program? The offer of the repeat in a better program? Nina happy, the celebration, Kyle’s arrival, her taking him home, their discussions, the issue of sexual encounter? The FBI interviewing Nina? Nina and the effect, her being suspended, the crimes because of the underage models? Kyle and his liking his boss, scenes with the kids, their discussions, the young boy coming in and agreeing to pose? The sudden decision to move, packing, Nina wanting the address, the FBI, her driving down, the FBI plan, the group gone before they could swoop? Nina and the final discussion on Kyle, his going? The issue of this kind of website?

6. Derek and Cindy: the marriage, the child and its death, looking at the images of home movies? Derek as a former marine, his experiences, at home, his desk job, seeing him at work? Cindy, feeling the distance, going to the chat room, the texting (and the texts available forever)? Derek and his gambling, the credit card, all the money gone, asking the police for an investigation, the police being too busy? The frequency of identity theft? Getting the private detective, his investigations, finding a suspect? Derek reading his wife’s conversation in the chat room, the effect? The suspect, watching him, going to the dry cleaners, at his house, stalking him, getting the gun, the man with the gun, the confrontation, the fight? Cindy watching, a reconciliation? The man stalked also being a victim of fraud? What future?

7. Ben, the nerd, his look, alone, loving music? Jason and Fry, the age, experience, Jason and his dead mother, his father giving up his job as a policeman, working, trying to bring up his son? Fry as a friend, with an ordinary family? Their watching Ben, laughing, the decision, inventing Jessica, the texting, watching Ben in the cafeteria? Creating the scenario? Gauging him, sending the sexy picture, the interchange, Ben and his photographing himself, sending it? Everybody in the school knowing? Ben and his decision to hang himself, his being saved by his sister, in hospital, in the coma?

8. Ben at home, his relationship with his mother and father, sister? The mother and her care? The father and his distance? An awkward young man, the hanging, his sister saving him? The shock, his father’s reaction, called, practising the law? Going to hospital, not coping, not being able to stay with his son? The mother and the urgency, urging her husband to stay? His decision to search, Michael coming to the hospital, talking, communicating by text, Michael and lies? Jason and his covering by wanting to talk with Ben’s father but calling himself Michael? The discovery in the photo album that Michael was Jason, going to the house, fighting with Jason’s father? Jason and his grief?

9. Jason and Fry, at home, the shock, their excuses, Jason communicating with Ben’s father, his own father and the tense relationship, and the text of all this with Jason’s father able to read it? His decision to delete it?

10. Common Internet stories with no easy answers?

FELONY

Australia, 2014, 97 minutes, Colour.
Joel Edgerton, Tom Wilkinson, Jai Courtney, Melissa George.
Directed by Matthew Saville.


By definition, a felony is a serious crime. Because of the title of this film, audiences may be expecting a high-powered crime drama. They may well be disappointed because this is a very-low key but realistic treatment of a crime, an unintended careless knocking of a paperboy to the street with a car and the driver not immediately facing up to the reality, the responsibilities and the consequences.

But audiences might welcome the fact that this is a drama confined to suburban Sydney streets, characters being fairly ordinary, people one might pass in the street every day. This means that they can identify much more readily with the characters and situations, situations anyone could find themselves in unexpectedly.

Actually, the film does open with some police action, a raid in a warehouse, shots fired, the chase, arrests – and then the squad celebrating down at the local pub, pleased with an proud of their success. It is in the aftermath of the celebration that the accident occurs. While there are some moments of attention to other cases being investigated, including tracking down a man who has assaulted a young girl and has been supported in hiding by his girlfriend, finishing up in court. And there are further arrests consequent to the raid on the warehouse.

Most of the action, however, takes place with five central characters. Joel Edgerton portrays the hero of the raid, escaping being wounded because a shot has hit his protective vest. It is he that has had the accident, bumping the paperboy in the dark at 5 AM, delaying momentarily to help and then not telling the full truth. Tom Wilkinson plays the chief detective, who has had some personal grief, is on the wagon, but has given his life to the police and continues intensely with the cover-up. Jai Courtney is the earnest young policeman, something of a righteous crusader, who is suspicious of the accident report, re-listens to the recording of the call for ambulance help; also becoming very sympathetic to the mother of the victim, going out of his way to help her, something which bewilders her. Melissa George plays Joel Edgerton’s wife, made participant in the cover-up and facing the dilemma of whether her husband should admit the truth or should be more caring of her and his family.

This is a drama about conscience played in the context of ordinary day life, which means that the audience is challenged, perhaps more than usual, to test themselves and see where sympathies lie and what they would do in such a situation themselves. While conscience demands honesty, circumstances can untangle the motives for admitting responsibility or not. We also see that it depends on ultimate integrity as well as an emotional response to being guilty of such an accident, silence, and making peace with those who have been affected by grief.

1. The title, the nature of crime, police work, the courts, punishment? External punishment? Internal?

2. The Sydney settings, the limited suburban area, below-keep presentation? The warehouse, the police stations, homes, hospital?

3. A film of conditions, truth, responsibility, honesty and integrity or – the consequences?

4. The drama of the initial raid, Malcolm and his leadership, in action, the chase, the Asian man shooting, Malcolm and his best, punching the? The
teamwork?

5. The celebration, the pub, Malcolm leaving, writing, distracted, the bullet on the bike, hitting him, stopping?

6. Malcolm stopping, hesitating, checking the bully, ringing for the ambulance, its being recorded and replayed? The arrival of the ambulance, the arrival of the police? The arrival of Carl Summer and him, Summer taking charge, treating people, getting Malcolm statement, the issue of the other car in the lights on its the, use it would possibility? Diligence later seeing this in again, but this time hearing what he had to say, the conversation with Malcolm, the decision to continue with the cover-up?

7. Malcolm, upset, wife and family, eventually telling her the truth, her anger, wanting him to continue with the cover-up, not liking what had happened to her and complaining that Malcolm had made her like this?

8. Carl, age, experience, his work, on the wagon, wife and son, his son and swearing, his own language? Jim arriving at 5 o’clock, blind? Carlton this conversation with Jim, arriving at the accident, taking charge, getting the onlookers away? Talking with Malcolm, the later revelation of the complete conversation with Malcolm, his urging the cover-up, making excuses, Malcolm and his integrity, his place in the force? Carl’s motives, the police force as a band, one band, even a bad band, but also the one song? His head to the office, talking with Mark of the office, later going to meeting, upset that Malcolm wanted to tell the truth?

9. Jim, well-dressed, his suit, earnest, Crusader, the case with Carl, visiting the woman, her defiance of the police, a partner, the paedophile, his being captured, in court, Carl and his anger with the bail decision, the woman laughing into region? Going back to his office, drinking?

10. Jim, his care for the mother of the injured boy, who Indian background? As a hospital, attraction, comforting in brief, Malcolm and Julie coming with flowers and consolation? The mother and her gratitude?

11. Jim, the continued investigations, suspicions about Malcolm? Reading the statement, listening to the record of the call the ambulance, his reasons for pursuing the case, the discussions with Carl, Carl and his decisions? Jim defying him?

12. Jim, going to the house of the mother, touching her, going too far, the attempted kiss, the woman and her wilderness bewilderment? His changing sense of self, the possibility of doing something wrong?

13. Malcolm, driving, the accident and the effect? Going to the tour of the house? The mother and the response?

14. A small story in a small area, audiences able to identify with the characters and the situations?

AMERICAN PSYCHO

US, 2000, 100 minutes, Colour.
Christian Bale, Justin Theroux, Josh Lucas, Bill Sage, Chloe Sevigny, Reese Witherspoon, Samantha Matthis, Matt Ross, Jared Leto, Willem Dafoe, Cara Seymour, Guinevere Turner.
Directed by Mary Harron.

Patrick Bateman, the elegantly-styled, yuppy 80s American Psycho. Mary Herron's 100 minute movie version of Brett Easton Ellis’ controversial novel is very well done indeed, going to the core of the novel, it seems, and taking key episodes to symbolise the journey into the mind of the judgmental, smooth-veneered serial killer. And Christian Bale gives a persuasive performance as Patrick Bateman.

Patrick Bateman assures us that he has no personality within. He has no emotions or motives - except disgust and greed. His face is a mask (although he also wears a number of masks and make-up). He is the self-creation of marketing, magazines and fashion for the Wall Street dealers - and he might have turned into Gordon Gecko.

But the world that governs his self-creation is a commercial 'out there' - at clubs and the best (the 'in') restaurants. He knows the best to eat and drink (and sniff). He can catalogue his toiletries. His wardrobe is perfect. He can conform to the expectations of bosses and order his life and work. He does not personalise his life or relationships - his cavalier affair with a drug-addicted socialite (Samantha Mathis) and dealing with his brittle fiancee (Reese Witherspoon showing us what her character in Election might be like a few years on). He does personalise his murdering his victims: a homeless man in the street, prostitutes, business rivals, but this is darkest shadow.

People like the rival he murders, the lawyer he confesses to all think he is someone else. Willem Dafoe as the detective never gives a moment's suspicion to him. Patrick Bateman has so created his persona in the expected image of society, high society, that, even when he desperately confesses, they do not believe him, not even take him seriously. The mask has become the completely acceptable person.

Well, perhaps we all knew that the Wall Street yuppies who spent time enviously comparing the texture, colour and fonts of their business cards, were, under the brand clothes, lotions and cosmetics, really narcissistic, murdering psychopaths!

But this film tries to image something of the desire for happiness. Patrick Bateman shows the temptation of the other, broad path, to happiness which is to lose self completely, take on another's life (and take away another's life) to the acclaim of society with its superficial expectations.


1. Brett Easton Ellis, his reputation as an author? Controversy? His perceptions on American society?

2. A film from the 1990s, the title, now taken for granted, a phrase that people are used to”?

3. The director and actress, Guinevere Turner, adapting the novel, condensing it, 100 minutes? The essence of the novel?

4. The 1980s setting, the Reagan era, reflections on that era, the greed is good era, Gordon Gecko era? The musical score, the range of songs? The atmosphere? The importance of fashion, men’s fashion, lotions and body care, hairstyles, fine food and cuisine, restaurants and reservations, apartments and luxury furniture, the discussion of business cards and colours and textures?

5. American yuppy men, women in the background, self-image, jobs, pride and competitiveness? Wall Street and finance? The core of American business – and in the light of the global financial collapse of 20 years later?

6. The young men at work, friendship, relaxations, rivalry? Their identity from their work?

7. Patrick Bateman as an icon after this novel and film? His voice-over, symbol of American men, his description of himself, nothing inside, his exterior being a mask, and the image of the mask on his face and peeling it off? Play on names and assuming different identities? His not having any family? His relationship with Evelyn, the expected marriage, his not being committed? His relationship with Courtney? His preoccupation with sexuality, porn on his television, his monologues? As perceived by others, by women, by men?

8. The rivalries, the encounter with Paul Allan, comparisons, talk, inviting him to the meal, going to the apartment, the talk, the axe, Patrick killing Paul Allen? later ringing his lawyer, explaining the situation, his lawyer thinking it was someone else, having meals with Paul Allen in London? Patrick’s real identity, and unreal identity?

9. The investigator, friendly, Patrick charming him, the discussions at the office, going to the meal, the issue of Paul Allen and his disappearance, the investigator giving him the alibi? Not believing the Patrick could be guilty?

10. Jean, subservience to Patrick, in love with him, helping, the bookings, the invitation to his apartment, his comments on her clothes, wearing a skirt, changing for the evening meal, the choice of restaurant, staying in the apartment, the phone call, his inviting her to leave, the later seeing his book and the doodles and grieving at whatever was wrong with Patrick?

11. Evelyn, her chatter, a hollow person, society, brash? The break?

12. Courtney, drugs, her relationship, the affair?

13. Brice, his best friend, talk, the other friends at the club, Luis and his misunderstanding Patrick and thinking it was a provocative sexual come-on?

14. The prostitutes, Patrick and his cruising, picking up the prostitute, her previous experience in a hospital, giving her cash? Elizabeth at home, provocative conversation? The threesome? The killing?

15. The episode with the blood-stained sheets at the laundry and his antagonism towards the Asian couple and their service?

16. Seeing Patrick as a killer, psycho, his explanation of the need to kill, the apartment and the range of dead bodies? The prostitute and her opening the doors, running away, running down the stairwell, Patrick with the saw, his throwing it down the stairwell? In the street, shooting, the woman standing by, the concierge and the people at the office building?

17. And yet his obsessive behaviour, wanting to be clean, neat, not wanting to be touched?

18. His ringing the lawyer, the talk, meeting the lawyer at the club, the lawyer not believing him? Getting the others talking about Paul Allen?

19. Brett Easton Ellis and his ideas a bout Patrick Bateman, as a symbol of the American male, US surface, style, yet inner emptiness, rage, misogynistic attitudes, competitive in business? The television interview with President Reagan and Brice commenting on his inner emptiness?

20. The final close-up on Patrick’s eyes and what the audience was left with and would take away?

MOZART AND THE WHALE

US, 2005, 97 minutes, Colour.
Josh Hartnett, Radha Mitchell, Gary Cole, Sheila Kelley, John Carroll Lynch, Nate Mooney, Rusty Schwimmer, Robert Wisdom.
Directed by Petter Naess.

Mozart and the Whale is not a story about the composer nor a film about the deep sea and its inhabitants. Rather, these are the ways in which the two central characters dress for an excursion to a social and walking around the city, Isabelle dressed as Mozart, Donald with a whale costume.

What is significant is that this is a film about people with Aspergers. The condition has been recognised, though questioned, and explorations of its link with autism have been of considerable attention. There have been a number of films illustrating autism and Aspergers, like Rain Man as well as Adam with Hugh Dancy. Of particular interest is the film biography of the autistic but highly achieving, Temple Grandin.

Josh Hartnett plays Donald, who has genius capacities with numbers, but behaves awkwardly while knowing something about his condition. Radha Mitchell plays Isabelle, a very straightforward young, blunt in her expression, also conscious of her condition with the possibility of controlling how she acts. A number of character actors portray men and women in an institution, giving the audience the opportunity to see variations on autistic themes and the way that these characters interact with each other.

Donald is attracted to Isabelle, but she seems to be rather more freethinking, enjoying the outings with Donald, but wary of his intentions of marriage. After distancing herself from Donald, she realises her limitations, the dependence on him, an emotional film which ends with a very happy scene, Donald and Isabelle celebrating their wedding with all their friends from the centre at the table.

1. The title, the references to Donald and Isabelle their costumes? The images?

2. An American story, universal? Autism? Aspergers Syndrome? Audience awareness, understanding, acceptance?

3. The American city, the taxi, the street, the Centre for the group, inside and outside? Identifying with the characters? Their issues? The musical score?

4. The introduction to Donald, in the taxi, talking incessantly, statistics, the visualising of his mind-images and the city grid for taxis? His abilities with numbers and mathematics? The crash, the flowers, the passengers, walking away?

5. Donald, his self-image, knowing himself, maths? The birds? His care? Talking, awkward? Yet his leadership in the centre? The separation of men and women, going outside, his telling his story, family background, his growing up, his awareness of his condition?

6. The other members of the Centre, the happy woman and her genial remarks? The hard woman and her blunt comments? The fey young woman? Roger and his talking with Donald? The black inmate? Gregory, his considering himself an author, his attraction to Isabelle, asking Donald to be his go-between? Isabelle and her arriving, impact on the group?

7. Isabelle, her Aspergers’ behaviour, blunt, blurting things out, her personality, the background of her family, growing up? Meeting Donald, the talk, the bond, going out?

8. Donald, his apartment, going out, hesitations, the costume of the whale, his experience in town? His love for Isabelle, reserved, wanting to marry her?

9. Isabelle avoiding Donald, the break? The mixed messages? In the institution? His 17 calls, her waiting to him? Meeting again, the dependence? Declarations of love?

10. The celebratory meal, everyone present, the joy, the marriage?

11. The film offering insight into Aspergers by explanations, via feelings and emotions, by empathy with the story?

THE INFINITE MAN

Australia, 2014, 85 minutes, Colour.
Josh Mc Conville, Hannah Marshall, Alex Demetriades.
Directed by Hugh Sullivan.

Which is which is the key question that audiences will have throughout most of this film. They might well be wondering, as well, when is when. and, especially, who is who at the very ending of the film.

The Infinite Man is a small and slight film, with a cast of only three and only two locations, an interesting example of small-budget filmmaking and have the filmmakers are able to work successfully within their budget. It is something of a romance, something of a romantic triangle, but mostly a variation on time-travel, raising issues of identity.

The location is the South Australian desert near Woomera. There is also use of a beach location. The cast of three consists of Josh Mc Conville as Dean, a romantic in love with Lana (Hannah Marshall). The third in the triangle is the caddish Terry (Alex Demetriades).

At the opening, Dean and Lana arrive to celebrate an anniversary, only to discover that the hotel out in the desert has been abandoned. Dean is a planner and had everything worked out for this anniversary – but not the arrival of Terry who disrupts the whole proceedings.

One year later, the episode is about to be re-created. But this time, Dean has been working throughout the year on a machine which will return him to the previous year and his encounter with Lana.

Well, what follows is a basic incident that Dean did not anticipate. The present Dean encounters last year’s Lana. This year’s Lana encounters last years in Dean. And Terry turns up.

And hence, the title, the various times that Dean can go back with time travel – but always with that complication that the previous incarnations of Dean will also be present. And Lana. Which is why the key question is which is which Dean, which is which Lana.

Because the film is done with the light touch, audiences may find these comings and goings rather slight and only mildly amusing. But, if they are drawn into the atmosphere of the time travel and its consequences, they may find it a pleasing entertainment.

There is happy ending with Dean and Lana, flowers and chocolates – but, we are still not sure, which is which!

1. Romance, romantic triangle, science-fiction?

2. The title, the application, so many renditions of Dean?

3. South Australian locations, the flat desert, the abandoned hotel, the beach? The rooms? The time machine? The musical score?

4. The introduction to Dean, his talking to the audience, the balcony, looking at Lana, on the rocks? The beach? The focus, his memories?

5. The anniversary, the car arriving at the location, the hotel, abandoned, the memories for the food, for the sexual encounter? The possibilities for this anniversary, the books on sexual positions?

6. Lana, as a person, arriving, a reaction to the anniversary, wearing the same dress? Her response to Dean?

7. Terry, his arrival, the breakup four years earlier, the two weeks together, his wanting to reunite with Lana, his talk at the Olympics, bringing his javelin, using the taser on Dean?

8. One year later, Dean and his work on the machine, going back, a new person, a new Lana? The comedy of the new Dean meeting the old Lana and vice versa? The different reactions?

9. The further changes of time, the new creations of Dean, of Lana, of Terry?

10. The issue of which is which Dean, which is which Lana?

11. The audience trying to keep pace with whatever time the action was in? Each Dean, each Lana?

12. Terry, the car, his wanting to take Lana, her reactions with him?

13. The phone calls, from one Dean to the other, the audience having seen the phone call previously? The interchanging, Dean getting his hand caught in
the car door?

14. The suggestions about flowers and chocolates, a Dean finally bringing them to a Lana?

15. The focus more on amusement and confusion rather than an exploration of identity and time travel?