HOLY FLYING CIRCUS

UK, 2011, 89 minutes, Colour.
Steve Punt, Charles Edwards, Rufus Jones, Tom Fisher, Darren Boyd, Jason Thorn, Roy Marsden, Michael Cochrane, Stephen Fry.
Directed by Owen Harris.

The title indicates that this will be a film about Monty Pythons Flying Circus. It is specifically about the aftermath of the making of The Life of Brian and the outcry against the film in 1979.

By 1979, the Pythons had been successful in their television programmes as well as in several films including Monty Pythons and the Holy Grail and Jabberwocky. They had many targets and were adept at clever and incisive satire. The six members of the group had university backgrounds, were particularly well educated, experienced on stage in comedy, in performance as well as in writing.

The film opened in the United States and was immediately howled down as blasphemous, audiences and critics not able to see the humour in the parody of so many historical films and the traditional Biblical films.

Each of the six Pythons had his own distinctive presence and style, manner of speaking. John Cleese, very tall, peremptory, contradictory, sarcastic and aggressive capitalised on these in his characters and performances. By contrast, Michael Palin was usually smiling and his characters were genial. There are several sequences in this film indicating is niceness – which audiences of his later travel shows would agree with. Graham Chapman, the out-of-the-closet homosexual member of the group, who played Brian, could play ordinary characters. Eric Idle was the joker and something of a wood-be entrepreneur. Terry Jones, who was the director of the films, had idiosyncratic pronunciations and was also clever at portraying masculine-looking women. Terry Gilliam was an American, and animator, responsible for so much of the eccentric and amusing visuals for the shows.

The casting in this television film is often quite extraordinary. Darren Boyd is perfect as a young John Cleese, voice, manner, and particularly look. Charles Edwards could easily pass as Michael Palin himself, an extraordinary facial likeness. Steve Punt is not unlike Eric Idle. And Tom Fisher does a passable Graham Chapman. Rufus Jones, portraying Terry Jones, does not look like him in the ordinary sense but looks like him and sounds like him in his performance as Michael Palin’s wife. The lookalike for Terry Gilliam, Phil Nichol, is not bad.

As in the Pythons sketches, each of them takes on various roles throughout this film.

Jason Thorne sends up an exploitative BBC producer, changing his mind instantly, harsh on his staff, determined for the Friday night, Saturday morning, program to have heightened conflict, inviting the Pythons to participate and interested in getting controversial and argumentative church figures. The Bishop is Mervyn Stockwood of Southwark, unfortunately referred to in passing as Catholic but in fact he was Anglican. The second contributor was Malcolm Muggeridge, former editor of Punch, with a rather wild reputation despite his very British-mannered decorum, who had recently come under the influence of Mother Teresa.

The film has various meetings of the Pythons, the attitude towards their comedy, the film itself, meetings with the producer who was very happy – and unhappy after the premiere in the United States.

The screenplay focuses mainly on John Cleese and Michael Palin. The two actors are certainly the best of the six and sustain interest in the film. Cleese is unwilling to participate in the television debate while Palin is very strong for it, offering, despite his hesitations, to do the debate. He takes it very seriously and does a lot of preparation. Cleese offers to be offensive. As it turns out, the debate, chaired by a very young Tim Rice, gives the opportunity for the two opponents of the film (who later admitted they missed the first 15 minutes and thus missed the clear differentiation between Jesus and Brian with the visit of the Magi) to talk down at the Pythons. Transcripts of the actual debate form the basis for the screenplay – although, as seen in the documentary, Jesus Christ Moviestar, it was Terry Jones rather than Michael Palin who participated in the debate with Cleese, the Bishop and Muggeridge. Michael Cochrane does a perfect impersonation of Malcolm Muggeridge.

While there are no private scenes for five of the Pythons, many of the scenes for Michael Palin are with his wife at home, she being supportive, sometimes critical, with scenes with Palin on the phone with his mother who does not understand and who finally appears watching the debate. Charles Edwards performs as the mother.

In the meantime, there are various groups of Christians in opposition to the film without having seen it. There are various meetings with a leader, a man with a stammer (echoes of Life of Brian as well as A Fish called Wanda) and a man with Tourette’s Syndrome blurting out curses and swearing at odd moments. They come to the studio to the debate and are disedified by the manner and words of the Bishop and Malcolm Muggeridge. They become apologetic and finally have a drink with the Pythons.

Some of the humour would not have been suitable for 1979 – this film opening with Jesus walking through the desert, encountering a man and breaking wind in his face. There is an episode with Jesus, especially in a discussion with God the Father as they watch the show. Stephen Fry is God the Father and has a few reprimands for his son, telling him to grow up.

The Life of Brian was banned by 23 councils in Britain and not allowed to be shown on television until the 1990s. Yet, in other countries, especially in Australia, the film was seen as amusing satire, critical of religion certainly, but not Jesus of the Gospels. In the film, there is discussion about the famous sequence of the Sermon on the Mount, which parodies the Sermon in the King of Kings. The Pythons emphasise that Jesus is not to be identified with Brian and point to several scenes where the distinction is made.

In some countries, the film was a classic instantly, but it has taken a lot longer for it to be established in the British consciousness (with John Cleese continually making derogatory statements about Britain – and film indicating that he left to live in the United States).

ROCK THE CASBAH/ROCK BA-CASBA.

Israel, 2012, 93 minutes, Colour.
Yon Tumarkin, Roy Nick, Henry David.
Directed by Yariv Horowitz.

Rock the Casbah is an Israeli film of 2012, set in 1989 with young men, Israeli conscripts, sent on service to Palestinian towns in Gaza to patrol and keep order.

The audience goes into Palestine with these young men, travelling with them on the bus, their alighting in the desert, the setup with the tents, the communal showers, meals, a military lifestyle. The question is raised for audiences as to how much training they received, enabling them to do their job, to keep calm in themselves despite young men and children throwing stones and firebombs at them, and not to respond angrily whatever the provocation.

The provocation comes fairly quickly as stones are hurled at these young men, often by young children, but there are more serious attacks with Molotov cocktails, the pushing of a washing machine from the top of the roof and its killing one of the young soldiers, a particularly angry young man. The commander orders the young men to keep vigil on the roof of the house from which the washing machine was thrown. This is a huge burden for the family, the father who continually protests, the mother who is caring for her children and is defiant of the young soldiers. They are considered by the people in the village as collaborators.

The film focuses on one young man in particular, Tomer, who has been friendly to the children, plays with the young child of the house who continually plays guns and ‘Hands up!’. It becomes very difficult later in the film when the child actually has a grenade and has to be talked down.

The film highlights the personalities of the young men, their vigils on the roof, the clashes with each other, the tensions, wanting to get out of the house – and even going to eat hummus in a local cafe much to the anger of their commander when he finds them, calling them spoiled brats, as well as the suspicions of the Palestinians watching.

A crisis comes when the young man sees the killer and there is a pursuit. Tomer is under pressure, has tried to see a psychologist who promises to see him but is missing when he goes to her door, has experienced the frustration of the mission to keep order, has repressed his anger and, although he is a believer in peace, his anger overcomes him.

Films like this are important for Israelis and Palestinians, this film being funded by Israel. And they are important for audiences worldwide to get a feeling of the occupation by seeing them.


1. An Israeli film of the 21st century about the 20th century? Israel, Gaza, Israelis, Arabs, occupation, soldiers on guard?

2. The title? The reference to the song, the use of songs of the period? The musical score?

3. The impact for Israeli audiences, the Palestinian audiences, world audiences? A contribution to understanding, to peace?

4. The settings, young troops going to Gaza, in the bus, listening to the radio, 18 year-olds, together, out of the bus, the terrian, the desert, the villages, the old buildings, the ordinariness and poverty?

5. The limitations of life for the Palestinians? The Israeli military presence? Their homes, cafes, possessions?

6. The reaction of the young, the children throwing stones, the older young men, stones, Molotov cocktails? The reaction of the young soldiers? Hostility, anger?

7. Patrols, the behaviour of the young men, daring, angry, pursuing the young Palestinians? The washing machine thrown from the roof? The death of Ilya?

8. The occupation of the house, the concern of the father, seen as a collaborator, the mother of the children, the defiance? The little boy and his playing, hands up? The grenade?

9. The audience entering with the group, understanding National Service, conscription, the effect on the young men at this stage of their life? The issue of how much training? Their quarters, the tents, showers, the meals, the military conditions, the effect on them?

10. The various personalities, the details of the duties, friendliness with the young boy, a game of Hands Up? The soldiers playing or not? The children following on the streets? Tomer and his relationship with the children, friendliness? The various squads, their supervisor, the attacks, the two lots of bullets, rubber and real? Ilya and his anger, the attack and his death? Tomer seeing the man who did it?

11. The role of the young commander, older than these young men, his orders, thinking them spoiled brats? The incident in their going to the cafe for hummus, his ordering them out? The wariness of the waiter, of the men in the cafe?

12. The men stationed on the roof, perpetual vigilance, there being lax, the interactions, the games, the seriousness, anger?

13. The focus on Tomer, a pleasant young man, with children, doing his job, on the roof, watching, witnessing the death? The difficulty in identifying the killer? The interview with the shrink? His later going, talking, going to the commander? Her not being there on his return? The commanders, the tension, seeing the killer, the pursuit, the ideological pressure, psychological pressure, shooting the man dead?

14. The role of the constant conscripts, military, Palestine in the 20th century? In the 21st?

15. The effect on Israelis, and on Israel and its policies?

FEARLESS

US, 1994, 118 minutes, colour.
Jeff Bridges, Isabella Rossellini, Rosie Perez, Tom Hulce, John Turturro, Benicio Del Toro.
Directed by Peter Weir.

Max Klein emerges from an air crash as a hero, leading people to safety from the wreckage and carrying a baby. He feels numb but elated and begins to review his life. Back home, he feels a distance from his wife and son, annoyed by a psychiatrist and clashing with a smart, money-chasing lawyer.

Asked by the psychiatrist to talk to a young mother whose two year old died and who is still in shock, he befriends her. He goes to a church with her, discusses God's will and is overwhelmed by a profound love for her. This further puzzles his wife. He secludes himself in his study and draws and collects paintings of near death experiences.

He dreams of the crash and remembers seeing a light and losing all fear, going to sit with a boy during the crash. At the same time, he is exasperated by the lawyer and the wheeler-dealings to get money for his partner's family.

Max goes shopping for gifts for the woman's dead son and his dead father and demonstrates to the woman it was not her fault for loosening her grip on her child by crashing his car into a wall. He asks his wife to save him. He almost dies but she revives him once again into a new life.

The screenplay for Fearless is by Rafael Yglesias from his novel. Direction is by Peter Weir whose films include Picnic at Hanging Rock, Gallipoli, Year of Living Dangerously, Witness, Dead Poets Society and The Truman Show. It is also a fine star vehicle for Jeff Bridges as Max Klein, the survivor of an air crash, dubbed a hero and 'The Good Samaritan' but who finds it hard to combine the sense of wonder he experiences in being alive with the ordinariness of his work and marriage.

This is not a mainstream Hollywood entertainment. It tries to imagine and explore some of the realities of suffering, pain and death in the contemporary world, issues of religious faith and the absence of a sense of God while puzzling over the arbitrariness of accidents and wondering about God' role in them. Jeff Bridges is persuasive as the ordinary hero who is motivated to save people. Rosie Perez received an Oscar nomination for her role as the distraught mother who gradually comes to a sense of peace through Max. Isabella Rossellini is the bewildered wife while John Turturro and Tom Hulce are effective as the psychiatrist and the lawyer.

Unusual themes and treatment for an American movie.


1.Impact of the film? Human dimensions? Spiritual dimensions? Life, death, love, presence of God, accidents, pain and suffering?

2.American settings, the effects for the crash, San Francisco and the cityscapes? The musical score?

3.Max emerging from the cornfields, carrying the baby, the extent of his leadership, rescues? The Good Samaritan? The media calling him a hero? His denying that he was a hero? The victims, the crash, the signs of the cross?

4.His leaving the scene, the shower, the pierced side (and the beginning of Christ parallels)? The exhilaration of the driving, his head out the window? The desert? The symbolism of his spit and the sand forming a paste?

5.Visiting his friend, the disasters of her life, the cafeteria, giving her the strawberry, the forbidden fruit, his past allergies, almost dying, eating the strawberries, a new life?

6.The FBI finding him, his replying that people didn't need him any more? His wanting to fly back to San Francisco, talk about the crash and facing the reality of the word? Formerly afraid to fly, now wanting first class? The psychiatrist, his recognising him as a shrink, his not being scared any more?

7.The return home, his wife kissing him, his not returning the kiss, simply being kissed? His response to his son?

8.The lawyer, his intrusiveness, identification? With the psychiatrist? Max hitting the psychiatrist? Speaking bluntly, the talk about seeing Gordon die? The reselling of the tickets, Max invited to lie? His yelling and not wanting to tell lies? Mrs Gordon and her reaction to him, the embrace?

9.The water and his washing his face? Revisiting his past? "I thought I was dead"? Jonah, the reporters, Byron and his coming back to thank Max, with his father? Jonah's scrapbook? The talk of the Good Samaritan and the rescues? Byron's testimony and Max running away?

10.The significance of the light, the various reflections and his seeing them, in the city, in the plane, walking through traffic? Walking on the deserted freeway?

11.The flashbacks (the close-ups of his eye ......)? Gordon and the computer? "You're such a neurotic"? The turbulence, the response to the danger in the plane?

12.Carla, wanting the seatbelt help from the flight attendant, the death of her son? Her later dreams?


13.Max seeing the light, the low sound, his saying that it was the moment of his death and he was not afraid, "I have no fear"? Max and the group, in the plane, leading them to safety, their support? His walking away? Wandering with the baby?

14.Driving away, the hotel, the shower, looking at himself, his eyes and his gaze? Driving, speeding, head out the window, the lively music?

15. Visiting the friend, after 20 years, asking after her, going to the cafe, having the strawberries, the past history of allergies? Her sad life and her support from him?

16. The FBI, the airlines representative, offering him a ticket, his wanting to fly first class, their accommodating him? The psychiatrist, sitting next to him, their talking, Max’s resistance?

17.Arriving home, his wife and son, his seeming distance, the same with his son?

18.The lawyer, in the house, the law, damages, the claims? Max not himself, ousting the lawyer? Hitting the psychiatrist?

19.The lawyer, blunt, his character, the issues of the money, Max’s intense scream? Finding out that his partner had cheated with his ticket? Visiting the wife, embracing her?

20.Byron coming to see him, with Jonah, Jonah’s suspicions? His father bringing him, the safety? The media describing him as a Good Samaritan? The upsidedown view of things?

21.In the traffic, the issues of God, God killing people? The TV reporters?

22.Flying again, Max overcoming his fears? the flashbacks of the crash in such detail at this juncture of the film? Carla, the flight attendant, the light at the moment of death, not being afraid?

23.Carla and her husband, his trying to get her to get out of bed, the visit with the psychiatrist? The Catholic themes, shame and guilt?

24.Max telling the story of his father’s death, the comments about God killing, that there was no God? Yet Carla wanting to visit the church? The crucifix, lighting the candle, the close-ups of the images? Choosing not to believe in nothing?

25.Max telling his wife about his overwhelming love? The psychiatrist’s response? That he would feel invulnerable?

26.Going to the group session, the sister and the story of the deaths, the holiday together, the effect? The mother wanting news about her son, Max and his harshness, the psychiatrist having to calm him down? The angry man saying that the process was sadistic? The man who was mixed up about the seat
placements but trying to help? Lisa, trying to comfort Carla, the anger and walking out?

27.Carla’s husband, his interest in payments, deals? The lawyer, driving with Max, the office consultation, getting Max to rethink what was happening in the last moments, each minute worth dollars? Max’s wife, her plea, Mrs Gordon and the need for support? Max and his attitude towards lying? Going to the roof, walking on the ledge, his arms outstretched, the wind, his wife and her upset?

28.Max, describing his day to his son?

29.Carla, the kiss, her reaction? Max taking her on a tour of the city, the buildings? Walking like ghosts in the crowd? The idea of buying presents for the dead, Carla’s reaction, her enthusiasm after Max bought the kit for his father? The toy for her son? The picnic at the mall, the strawberries, dancing in the mall? Carla having to let him go, blaming herself for not holding onto her child in the plane, lying in the confessional, going to the lawyer? Max and his bewilderment, trying to prove that Carla was not to blame, driving the car into the wall, saying the hail Mary? In hospital? Carla coming to coming to visit Max’s wife, the tension, the friendship, trying to comfort his wife, saying that he was her guardian angel?

30.His wife, looking at his dark paintings?

31.Carla, the sadness of her goodbye, being definite, leaving Max, and the question of Max’s future?

GOOD VIBRATIONS

Ireland, 2013, 104 minutes, Colour.
Richard Dormer, Jodie Whittaker, Liam Cunningham, Dylan Moran,
Directed by Lisa Barros D’ Sa and Glen Leyburn.

On the whole, audiences will receive many good vibrations while watching this film. This reviewer saw it with only one other person in the cinema preview and really wished that there were more people present, sharing their vibrations. On the whole, it is a feel-good film though it is set in many difficult days in Belfast of the 1960s and 1970s and during the Troubles.

This is the story of a Belfast man, who considered himself the best DJ in Belfast in the 1960s. His name is Terri Hooley, who also acted as a consultant for the film. He is played with quite some exuberance by Richard Dormer, bringing this character with all his strengths and his many flaws to quite vivid life.

Terri worked in a Belfast club but customers were in decline. With his growing awareness of the punk music movement, he was interested in promoting local bands, holding auditions, giving the players opportunities, inviting audiences, making records, and trying to promote them, even going to the BBC where he was not particularly well received although famous music DJ, John Peel, was supportive.

There are fantasy sequences in the film, especially with Terri’s childhood, imagining himself flying in his garden, the home where his communistic father, who stood for Parliament, very often and was always defeated, trying to inculcate a socialist awareness in his son. He was not particularly impressed when Terri had the brainwave of starting up a shop, a music shop, in central Belfast. The name of the shop was Good Vibrations. For many years, it was the centre of musical sales and activities and promotions.

Terri thought that music, especially the punk music of the period would attract young people and transcend the divisions of politics and hatred. To some extent, he was right.

The other important thing in his life was his meeting his wife, dancing with her, proposing, the hardships of their life together, his investing her savings in his enterprises, her supporting him despite so much exasperation. But, Terri also led a comparatively wild life, music being all rather than clear economics and accounts, running the risk of squandering his capital, always in view of his music dream.

This had some bad consequences on his marriage, his drinking, even his inability to hold his young baby with his trembling hands.

Yet, he persevered with his vision, was supportive of many musicians and groups, enjoyed promoting them, even despite threats of sectarian boycotting and disturbances in Belfast. There is a powerful supportive concert in Belfast at the end, Terri making his mark.

The film is enjoyable in its way, Richard Dormer’s performance being most impressive, and, in the context of Irish troubles, an affirmation of the message: make music not war.

1. The title? Belfast and the good and bad vibrations?

2. A human story, portrait of Terri, Belfast and the Troubles? Punk music, a celebration, uniting people, especially young people? The blend of these themes?

3. The focus on Belfast, the 1960s and 70s, archival material? The city, the homes, bars, shops, recording studio, the Hall, the girls outside Belfast?

4. The range of music? Of the period? The opening with Hank Williams? Punk music? The local bands, the range of songs?

5. The truth story of the stories of Terri, his wife, career? Flattering him, showing his flaws? His exuberance, contribution to music, to Belfast? His personal story? Relationship with his wife, her leaving, the child?

6. Terri as a boy, his father as an alternative for politics, the Communist Socialist background? The Hank Williams song? The home movie style, his flying amongst the roses? His age?

7. His parents, politics, his father and his attempts to get elected, criticisms of his son, standing outside the shop, calling capitalist?

8. Richard Dormer’s performance as Terri? Exuberant, the love of music, the best DJ in Belfast, the Troubles and fewer people coming to the club’s? Images of the past and the crowds? His meeting with, dancing, and love? Marriage, married life, the house, her support? Her job as a truancy officer and its effect on her? Giving him the £40 as guarantee for the loan for the shop? His mortgaging the house without her knowledge? Her sharing all his experiences
and jewellery? On the hill, telling him that she was pregnant? At home, his not being there, to the hospital, giving birth, waking up and finding their, but unable to hold the baby because of his trembling hands? All the friends of the hospital and her wanting them to go away? Her decision to leave? His disappointment? The end, coming to the performance and giving him support?

9. The punk era, the 1970s, the British bands? The style of music? Terri and Dave, dates help, accounting, keeping an eye on the money? The idea of the shop? Leasing it, opening it up, borrowing money? The customers? His excluding the young men – and there later returning and bashing him? Caught in the shop Good Vibrations, his father’s disdain? The group, listening to them, the other groups, the recordings, fewer results? His hearing the song that he liked, growing with success? His friend in London, drugs and his wealth? Sending the record after the group packing it, to all the agents? No reply? His visiting and interviewing people – and their rejection? The disc Jockey and his harshness? At the BBC, not letting him in, the reporter coming, recognising him, giving the record to John Peel, John Peel’s reputation on the BBC, the thrill of hearing the record, played twice, the celebration? His becoming something of a celebrity, his shop, his influence in the music world, the magazine interview and cover? The failure of his promoting the group, his excuses? Dave’s warnings?

10. The bashing, his debt, the idea of the performance, John Peel arriving, the crowds outside, the success? His explaining that he was impulsive, not caring about money profits?

11. The after information, his autobiography, Terri acting as a consultant for the film?

OMAR

Palestine, 2013, 96 minutes, Colour.
Adam Bakri, Leem Lubani, Samer Bisharat.
Directed by Hani Abu- Assad


Some years ago, Nazareth-born Arab director, Hany Abu Assad, made a very powerful film about Palestine called Paradise Now. He took the audience into a Palestinian village and introduced them to various families, especially to young men who have committed themselves to be suicide-bombers. It showed the making of videos explaining their motivation for their sacrifice, their getting through into Israel, and the decision of one not to carry on with the mission while the other did. It was a cinematic introduction to the world of suicide-bombers.

In this film, Omar, a Palestinian, is seen immediately climbing over the wall which divides Israel from Palestine. He is a young baker, who is wanting to visit a young girl, still at school, to whom he is attracted. He also wants to meet her brother, Tarek, a friend from childhood, who is involved in plans to target Israelis. A third man, Amjad, has also been a friend from childhood.

The three plan to ambush an Israeli and kill him. When they do confront their victim, decisions have to be made as to who will do the actual shooting, a personal dilemma. Soon, on the is pursued, especially in his wall-climbing, and chased through the town. When he is caught, he is tortured, is interrogated, and experiences something of a brainwashing though he thinks he is resistant to it. His interrogator uses methods familiar as good-cop, bad-cop, threatening Omar and then engaging with him rather personally. Omar experiences prison which also has its influence on his outlook.

On his release, the interrogators have an expectation that he will supply information to them. He does not want to, but feels the pressure. This is complicated when he finds that his girlfriend suspects that he is an informer and begins a liaison with his friend Amjad.

The interrogator keeps in touch with, Omar who is also approached by local Palestinian authorities who know quite a deal about him and want information from him.

This is sometimes powerful story of contemporary young man in a most difficult situation, with his traditions and loyalties, with the experience of Israeli occupation and dangerous environments, and the possibilities for his own life and future, prospects which are continually under threat.

1. A Palestinian perspective on Israel- Palestine tensions? Characters, situations, crises? The Palestinian director and his perspectives? Previous films?

2. The visuals of Palestine, of Israel, the towns and the contrasts in each territory? The presence of the wall, its height, its length, the checkpoints? Homes on each side? Shops? The role of the police, the borders, the Israeli police? The Palestinian authorities? Interrogations, prison? The feel of the place and the tensions? The musical score?

3. The title, the focus on Omar? Climbing the wall? Palestinian, his age, his friends from childhood? His work in the bakery? Terek’s sister, Nadia, and his love for her, climbing the wall to visit? The friends, their pledge, their meetings, plans, the ambush, the shooting – and the decision as to who would do the shooting?

4. Climbing the wall, the police seeing Omar, the chase through the town, his eluding the pursuit? His being caught, the interrogations, hanging up, the torture, wanting him to talk, the pressures? The methods of torture? The intelligence officer, getting information, the range of informers? The pressure to inform?

5. Omar, imprisoned, his experience there, the fellow prisoners? The interrogator and his continued contact, seeming friendliness? Omar complying, lies and confusion? Getting out, the meeting, Terek, tracking him down, Amjad and his being with Nadia, Nadia and her response? His going to the school, seeing her with the girls, chattering? His love for her?

6. Omar and his reputation, his being checked on, information, leading and misleading? The interrogator and his concern? The family, their response? Frequently being picked up, his own confusion, information or not, the interrogator, the personal touch, information about his family? The contrast with the Palestinians and their seeking information?

7. Terek, his escape, Omar going to see him? With Amjad, after his disappearance? The fight, the shooting, Terek’s, the decision not to bury him, to freeze his body for 60 days? This information coming to the Palestinians, their questioning Omar? Amjad, his disappearance, the news that Nadia was pregnant to him?

8. The buildup to the big strike, the ambush and plans? The bluff?

9. Omar, his family, going to work, Nadia and her reaction?

10. Nadia, her age, going to school, her place in the family, serving, with Terek? Omar and his love for her? The truth about her pregnancy, Omar coming to the family, making the proposal for Amjad to marry her? Her consent?

11. The years passing, Omar and his life, re-visiting, meeting Nadia, the children, Amjad and his death? Omar and his regrets?

12. Audience, presuppositions about Palestine and Israel, the political situation, oppression, the role of the authorities, police, Palestinian response to Israel, – but seen in the light of the human story?

YVES SAINT LAURENT

France, 2013, 105 minutes, Colour.
Pierre Niney, Guillaume Galliene, Charlotte Le Bon, Laura Smet.
Directed by Jalil Lespert.

Yves Saint Laurent was one of the best-known names in the world of fashion in the latter part of the 20th century, working in the industry from 1957, dying in 2008.

He is gaining quite some cinema interest because there was a documentary film made about him, L’ Amour Fou, something of a tribute from his partner, Peter Berge, but highlighting the main features of his life and career. Along with the present film under review, there is another film of the same name with Gaspar Ulliel in the title role.

This biopic is interesting when it gives some background to Saint Laurent’s background, his growing up in Algeria, his roots both in Algeria and in France, his work in Paris, especially becoming assistant to the then celebrated Christian Dior. Though young, he was inventive in his imagination, his visualising of shapes and designs, his inspiration in the geometry of designing dresses, his use of colour, and his talent for creativity.

At first, he seems a rather shy young man, nevertheless eager to succeed in his chosen career. The film reveals his crisis about being drafted for serving in the French military in the early 1960s in the Algerian war. At first reluctant, he was interviewed by the press and criticised. He decided to register but was soon found to have tendencies towards depression and was temporarily placed in an institution. He was fired by the boss of the company – but, with the help of an astute lawyer, and a pay out, he was able to found his own house of design. And he continued with this over the decades.

For those who are interested in and enjoy fashion, a great deal of attention is given in the film to the various shows, especially the bright shapes in the mid-1960s, the darker images of the early 1970s, the influence of Russia in the mid-1970s.

The film shows his meeting with Peter Berge, their long-term relationship, and Peter Berge’s custody of the Saint Laurent’s heritage, his fashion work as well as their large collection of artwork.

But, for a lot of the film, the audience becomes something of a voyeur audience, with a touch of the Peeping Tom, in being drawn into the designer’s private life, his sexual activities, his seeming recklessness, his infatuations and betrayals, his moods and eccentricities. He was not always a very nice person. We are offered a lot of information, visualised, that we probably did not need to know.

Which means that for those interested in the designer’s career, it is better to recommend the documentary rather than this more prurient look into his life.

1. The impact of Yves Saint Laurent in the 20th century? An icon in himself? In his fashion design? For 50 years?

2. Audience knowledge of him as a person? This film offering, perhaps, too much about him? His actual talent – but, the addictions of his life?

3. The world of fashion, Dior and the 1950s? Yves Saint Laurent as an assistant to Dior? His emergence in the 1960s, his own fashion house? 1965 and the Mondrian design? 1971 and the dark clothes? 1976 and the Russian design? The film as an opportunity for audiences to learn about and appreciate fashion? The fashion world and all that it entails, creativity, design, dressmaking, models and shows? The business side?

4. Yves Saint Laurent and his origins, his family, in Oman, the experience of Algeria, Paris? The war in Algeria, the family leaving? Yves and his settling in Marrakesh?

5. The introduction to Dior, Karl Lagerfeld, Pierre Berge, the titles and the transition to Berge’s memoir, the auction, the collection? The voice-over?

6. Yves, 1957, an awkward young man, shy, in his family, relationship with his parents, his sister? His talent? Advising Dior on narrowing the dress? Work obsessed? His success? His relationship with the models, with Victoire, socially, suggesting they marry? His homosexuality? His working with the team? Meeting Pierre and the artist, his portrait? The bond with Pierre? The issue of his military service, his own attitude, the media, his boss, his agreeing to go, in the institution, manic-depressive? His being fired, the lawyer taking up the case, winning, the cash benefits? Setting up his own house of fashion, his exhibitions, the shop? Pierre as his manager, diligent? The range of collections? His searching for inspiration and design?

7. The issue of homosexuality, the initial glances, eyes, looks? The relationship with women? With men? Meeting Pierre, the bond with him, living with him, going to the clubs, in the street soliciting and his being taken by the police? In Morocco, the liaisons? The up-and down relationship with Pierre? The meeting with Jacques, the infatuation, in love? Yet Pierre as the love of his life? The camp atmosphere of much of the film?

8. The change in his behaviour, going out, socialising, the range of friends, the taking of cocaine, the addiction? The stay in Morocco, meeting Loulou? The highs with the drugs? His continuing with them, Pierre’s exasperation? The addiction, the decadence in his life?

9. Victoire, relationship with her, marrying Roger, her work is a model, the incident with Pierre, her disgust with him for telling Yves, leaving?

10. The range of models, Betty, Loulou? The staff, Pierre and his moods? Yvonne and her patience? The interactions? The bitchiness?

11. The house in Morocco, the good times, Pierre managing, the lifestyle in Morocco? The relationship with Jacques, Pierre moving him out? Jacques always keeping it a secret?

12. A period of 20 years, the change in personality and style, from 20 to 40? The range of his success? The style of his life? The aftermath and his giving up drugs in 1990?

13. The world of fashion, design, the workers, dressing the models, the catwalk, the clients, the media, the interviews? The film immersing its audience in this world?

JACK TAYLOR: PRIEST

Ireland/Germany, 2012, 90 minutes, Colour.
Iain Glen, Nora- Jane Noone, Killian Scott, John Kavanagh.
Directed by Stuart Orme.

Priest is the fifth in the Jack Taylor series. (See the introduction to Jack Taylor: The Dramatist). Once again, it presupposes characters and situations from the previous films. This is particularly the case with memories of Jack’s mother, her friendship with father Matt Leckie Malachy.

This is very topical film.

The films are based on novels by Frank Bruen set in Galway. They are particularly Irish in subject and tone. Jack Taylor is a former Garda officer who takes on investigative jobs. He is a drinker and a fighter as played by Iain Glen. Priests appear throughout the films, especially at funerals. But, the parish priest, Fr Malachy, appears in most of the films. He is a friend of Jack, a large man and an inveterate smoker which many characters comment on. It emerges that he is a close friend of Jack’s mother who, it turns out, is a former Magdalen girl working in the laundries. Jack is not close to her but Fr Malachy brings them together. Jack is investigating murders associated with a cruel nun at the laundry in the 1960s and his mother gives him a name. They reconcile, somewhat, and Jack tends her when she has a stroke. In the next film, The Dramatist (2012), she dies and Fr Malachy explains that he loved her, platonically. He asks Jack whether he thought he had an affair with his mother. When Jack said he did suspect, Fr Malachy makes the strong point that people, these days, don’t think of decency with priests.

This is to the fore in Priest. It reflects many of the headlines in Irish media when news of sexual abuse broke and stories proliferated. This film includes several issues in 90 minutes, which many audiences would have identified with. While it is condemnatory of the clergy behaviour and failures in reporting to authorities, the screenplay does not labour this but takes the audience into some of the dire consequences of abuse.

Fr Malachy appears again after an elderly priest is decapitated in the church as the film opens. Fr Royce was an abuser and Fr Malachy, his assistant twenty years earlier, admits he was present at some of the abuse and delayed reporting, saying he was trained to be obedient to his parish priest, that these were church matters and that he answered to a higher authority. This lack of reporting because clergy thought the abuse was sin rather than crime became a key concern in government inquiries in Ireland and in other countries. Receiving a threatening note, Fr Malachy fears for his life and he is attacked and stabbed. He has tried to help the victims and regrets his behaviour in different times.

But, the film’s main focus on priests is Fr Royce, the decapitated priest. It soon emerges that he had abused at least two altar boys. The experiences are glimpsed in the adult victim’s memory flashbacks, mostly suggested but truly alarming in John Kavanagh’s performance as Royce, his predator look, his callous words, his grooming and seductive language in persuading the boys that these experiences were important for them, his crass descriptions and conscienceless controlling. Some time after the abuse, he was transferred to Boston (reference to the main US diocese with a bad history of abuse).

As if this were not bad enough, more is revealed towards the end of the film. A nun in the parish wanted to stop Fr Royce. She goes with Fr Malachy and accosts him in the sacristy. Royce is callously defiant – and rapes the nun. Audiences will be revolted at this reminder that rape is about sex but more about power. The sister has to leave the convent in shame and gives birth to a son. Fr Royce comes back, terminally ill, for the funeral of a family member, visits his victim and says he is asking her forgiveness. Her son hears this and it is he that kills the priest after they talk about his mother in the church.

The screenplay has other intricacies: the two boy victims (who watched the rape through the keyhole) have been damaged. They raped the nun’s twelve year old son as revenge on Royce. One, who held the boy down, is an addict and is killed. The other is a highly successful businessman with a family but who preys on boys, repeating the grooming phrases that Royce had used to try to persuade him.

The screenplay reminds audiences of the true sordidness of the abuse and some of the dreadful consequences. As a film showing some of these realities, this is a key film about priests and sexual and power abuse.

1. The fifth film in the series? Development of Jack Taylor’s character? The presence of Kate, the presence of Cody? Father Malachy?

2. The Galway settings, the church, the streets, the pubs, business offices, homes, ruins? Authentic feel? The musical score?

3. The title, the emphasis on Father Royce? Father Malachy and his role?

4. The topical nature of the plot, sexual abuse in the church in Ireland? Investigations? The law? The church and its role, considering abuses sin rather than a crime? The change in perceptions?

5. Jack, drinking again, the death of his mother, friendship with Kate, her being warned off working with him? Investigating with her? Friendship with Cody, Cody wanting a case? Working with Jack? The meeting with ruler, attracted to her, the drink, who will get his phone? Jack and his going to do is house, the night, getting information, puzzling about her relationship with her brother? Father Malachy coming to him with the note, asking him to investigate?

6. Father Royce, the scenes with the two boys, grooming and seduction, his callous behaviour, hitching up his trousers, the arrival of Father Malachy and Sister Joseph? The confronting him, his raping Sister Joseph, Father Malachy and his inability to do anything? The boys watching through the keyhole? Father Royce later being transferred to Boston? His return, the illness in the family, his going to see Una Tracy, her reaction, her son not knowing the truth? Inviting Una to the church, Christian going, meeting his father, their talk, Father Royce and his prayer, after asking Una to forgive him? His death? Decapitation? The cleaner discovering the body? The visit of Jack and Cody, the police?

7. Michael, as a victim, his going to therapy, the influence of his sister, his wife and children, the promotion of his company, the visuals, the meeting, his sister present? The later meeting and the deal by Skype? Jack’s intrusion? Jack’s meeting with him, telling him that he knew the truth? Michael not denying it?

8. Tom, imprisoned for raping Christian, drugs, the goods that he received, Michael supporting him financially, the thieves outside, Jack interrogating them, hitting them?

9. Tom, the drugs, the injection, his death? Jack and Cody present, the neighbours reporting the death, Kate’s arrival?

10. Michael, memories of the past, the flashbacks? Sexual proclivities? Following Peter, talking, giving him a lift, taking him to the ruins, the proposition, Peter getting out of the car?

11. Nuala and Jack arriving, trying to talk him down, his attack on his sister, on Jack, falling to his death, their saving Peter?

12. Sister Joseph, leaving the convent, not telling anyone, shame? Giving birth, bring her boy up, the situation of the rape – and her knowing the truth? Jack’s visit, defending her son, his studies, maturing? His listening in? His hearing Father Royce, going to the church, the murder? His killing Tom? Stabbing Father Malachy? Going to the family, threatening them with the knife, wanting Michael present? Cody going in, overpowered by Christian, urging Michael’s wife to look Christian in the eye, Christian dropping the knife?

13. Michael, hiring the assassin, the attempts on Jack, especially in the pub, his being saved by the bartender, getting the information, telling Kate?

14. Nuala, her influence on her brother, knowing about the abuse, getting him to therapy, advising him on business, the sexual attraction, her room with all the photos? Jack persuading her to come with him, confronting Michael?

15. A satisfactory mystery – with very hard themes?

EDGE OF TOMORROW

US/UK, 2014, 113 minutes, Colour.
Tom Cruise, Emily Blunt, Brendan Gleason, Noah Taylor, Bill Paxton.
Directed by Doug Liman.

If you are not a computer games player, give Edge of Tomorrow about 20 minutes and then you may enjoy it more than you expected. Those first 20 minutes are military minutes, aliens invading Earth, worldwide military trying to contain the invasion, troops coming from Asia towards Europe, troops moving across the English Channel towards France which has been devastated (some grim views of a destroyed Paris) as have other countries of Europe.

This is a Tom Cruise science fiction (his 2013 Oblivion was very interesting and enjoyable). He is Cage, an American in London, a PR man, who is commanded by the general (Brendan Gleason) to go to the front. He refuses, but is arrested and sent to the military base where he is given the rough treatment, called maggot, put down, clad in huge armour, put on a plane where he has to drop with others, a bit like an airborne D- Day, on the Normandy beaches. When he lands, he confronts the Alpha Alien, and is killed. But he does not die, rather, in a scenario like Groundhog Day, he lands again at the military base and goes through the process again, again, again and again.

Each time he makes a bit more progress in his mission. The key is that he meets Rita, named The Angel of Verdun, because of her heroism in the battle there (echoes of World War I). Her photo appears on the side of London buses to promote patriotism and for recruiting. Cage encounters her during his mission and she tells him to contact her when he goes back to start again. He does so and she puts him through his paces so that he is well-trained to continue with the mission, accompanying her. She has had the same experience as he but has lost her powers whereas he still has – to confront the Alpha Alien. They are helped by an eccentric but visionary scientist (Noah Taylor).

This may sound more than far-fetched. But, the screenplay is well-written, Cruise develops his character from reluctant PR man to very fit combat soldier and Emily Blunt, as Rita, can stand her ground against Cage as well as with him.

Most of the film develops the further steps in the narrative, step-by-step, returning to the start again and again, knowing better how to deal with the further steps until there is a confrontation, with rather spectacular special effects, between Cage and the Alpha Alien.

The film is geared towards the science-fiction and futuristic scenario film fans and should satisfy them – and, most of the critics around the world, liked it.

1. The title? The original novel: All you need is kill?

2. The first part of the film, resembling computer games, combat games, audience identifying with this or not?

3. After the combat, Carter and Rita and the explanation of the situation, the war, the attack of the aliens, the science behind the aliens, Carter’s hypotheses, and the possibilities for destroying the Chief alien? The credibility of this science? The aliens and their being able to reprogram a day?

4. The reprogramming of the day, the Groundhog Day experience, how used, the many repetitions, Cage having to die every time, yet further steps forward each time the day started again, enabling tension as Cage and Rita move further in the plot?

5. The locations, the city of London, the military base, the continent, the desolation of the combat fields, the desolation of Paris destroyed, the snow and ice at the dam? Under the dam? Under the Louvre? Whitehall, the military centre and offices? The laboratories? The musical score?

6. The overtones of World War I, Verdun, and the D- Day landings of World War II?

7. Cage, his life, publicist, in the military, going to Brigham, the job, his refusal, his arguments, the arrest?

8. The beginning of his day, the soldier calling him Maggot, meeting Farrell, Farrell confronting Cage, his words about combat, seeing him as a deserter? The training? The equipment? The men in the squad, their individuality, Farrell’s speech, discovering the cards? In the plane, Cage and his fear, experience, the explosions, having to drop? Landing, the battles, the aliens, the equipment, seeing the man crushed with the falling machinery, the confrontation with the Alpha Alien, Cage and his blood, his death? And starting again? The number of times this was repeated?

9. The important be seeing Rita, knowing that she was on the poster as a recruiting incentive, her being known as the Angel of Verdun? Her telling him to contact her the next time? His doing this, finding her with the machines, the buildup and her training him, the repetitions, the initial failure, success?

10. Rita, the experience of the war, at Verdun, her losing her power after repeating the days, the grief for the man who was killed? Meeting Cage, the training, the repetitions, the machines, take him to Carter, the explanations, the maps, trying to locate the Alpha, Carter, his personality, at Whitehall, his theories, his being fired?

11. Cage and Rita getting further on the ground with each attempt, Cage flying and looking at the dam, its vastness, below the dam, his search, the Alpha not there, his vision, seeing the Alpha in Paris, under the Louvre?

12. Getting further along in the story after many repetitions, in the car, taking the trailer, talking with Rita, being taciturn, conversation, her middle name – and her later giving it, Rose? The helicopter, the rest, the coffee, her determination about the helicopter, his warning that it would fail, her igniting nonetheless, the explosion, her not dying?

13. The decision to go to see Brigham, the many visits, the explanations, the information and the coincidences, his secretary, his authorising the equipment?

14. The continued pursuits, Cage being wounded, hospital, losing some of his blood? The need to destroy The Alpha more quickly?

15. The mission, going to the squad, giving them the information about themselves, their agreeing to help? Getting the equipment, flying to Paris, landing, the fight with the aliens, the explosions? Going to the Louvre, and using the equipment to cross the river? The plan, Rita to lure Alpha, Cage with the grenades, into the water, the underwater sequences, the pursuit of the Alpha, throwing the grenades, the explosion?

16. The special effects for the creatures, for the Alpha, for the action in the war?

17. Peace, Cage and his promotion, the squad still alive and his watching them march? Meeting Rita again? Peace?

18. The blend of action, science fiction, apocalypse, the saving of the human race, the future?

THE FAULT IN OUR STARS

US, 2014, 126 minutes, Colour.
Shailene Woodley, Ansel Elgort, Laura Dern, Willem Dafoe
Directed by Josh Boone.


No, this is not a Shakespeare film of Romeo and Juliet, star-crossed lovers, nor the version of Julius Caesar where the fault lies not in our stars but in ourselves. This is a film version of the very popular novel by John Green, designed for Young Adult reading. The book is a bestseller and this film has done very well at the box office.

It is a story about cancer.

Hazel is a teenager who was diagnosed with serious disease at the age of 13, making it difficult for her to breathe normally, requiring her to have a canister of oxygen which she has to take with her everywhere, and the connection to her lungs through her nose. She is generally a cheerful character, strong-minded, strong-willed, acknowledging her illness and its effect, and the potential shortness of her life. She has devoted parents, feels that sometimes they mother her over much. However, she does have some touches of cynicism.

To please her parents, Hazel goes to a support group, not finding it very helpful, but listening to a young man, Isaac, who has already lost an eye and is about to lose the other, talking about his love for a girl called Monica who will support him (she doesn’t). But Hazel is also interested in his friend, Gus (Ansel Elgort) who suffers from leukaemia. He states that his one desire is oblivion and she reacts strongly against him. She talks to him after the meeting and they click, going out for walks together, talking, finding each other congenial. While she is short and strong-minded, he is rather tall, gawky, and an optimist with a perennial smile.

A lot of the action centres on a book that Hazel has read and lends to Gus. He is impressed, they talk about it, and she confesses that she has written to the author asking about life after the novel ends – but has had no reply. Gus emails the author, who lives in Amsterdam, and he replies. They decide that it would be wonderful to go to visit him in Amsterdam. After a lapse in health, and the doctors warning against it, the two go to Amsterdam with Hazel’s mother (Laura Dern).

Just as we might have thought that the film was becoming a touch sentimental, the visit to the author is actually a disaster, an interesting grumpy and grouchy performance from Willem Dafoe. The film and its impact gets a little tricky when the couple decide to visit the Anne Frank House, some commentators feeling that this demeans Anne Frank and the Holocaust by making a comparison with her fate and that of the terminally ill with cancer. Anne Frank herself, probably, would be far more sympathetic. They listen to her words, her experience of confinement and impending death. The young couple take heart from her story.

Since death is inevitable for both of the characters, the audience is not surprised when one of them dies and the effect that this has on the one remaining. Gus has been an enthusiastic supporter of making a mark in the world whereas Hazel says that it is enough to love one person.

This is not the type of film that is geared to an older audience. It is clearly targeted to the Young Adult audience and their experience of life and death, limited as it is because of simply being young. Judging by the box office, the younger audiences do identify with the characters and appreciate experiencing their lives and deaths.

1. The Shakespeare references to star-crossed lovers? The fault in our stars – and the fault, rather, in ourselves?

2. The Young Adult novel, the target audience, the female audience especially? Identifying with Hazel? Interest in Gus?

3. The cancer themes? The reality, pain, short lives, prospects of death, life after death, meaning in life? The experience of illness, hope, possibilities of overcoming the illness? Not? The various sayings throughout the film: the experience of rain to have a rainbow?

4. The use of the Anne Frank parallel? Effective as an inspiration for a young woman? Criticisms that the comparison with Anne Frank was offensive because of the vast sorrow of the Holocaust? The visit to the Anne Frank house, Hazel and her struggle to get up the steps, her being impressed by Anne Frank, kissing Gus, the visitors applauding?

5. A film of sentiment, emotion, the harshness of the visit to Peter and the effect on Hazel and Gus?

6. The significance of Peter’s book, the impact on Hazel, giving it to Gus, their sharing the experience, the questions, Hazel writing letters, the response? Gus’s email? The reply? The quote from the book? The characters? Finishing in mid-sentence? Hazel wanting to know what happened afterwards? The possibilities of the visit, the family having no money, Hazel and her collapse, in the ICU unit, the visit to the doctors, their being against the trip to Holland? Gus and the money? The trip, the beauty of Amsterdam? Going to Peter’s house, the welcome from the secretary, the beautiful meal at the hotel and his paying for it, the secretary paying for it? The letters on the floor, the chaos, Peter and his drinking, rough and rude, putting on the Swedish rap music, refusing to answer the questions, abusive, Gus turning off the music, Hazel and her anger, their leaving? The secretary following, arranging the tour, going to the Anne Frank house? The sudden appearance of Peter at Gus’s funeral, Hazel’s anger, ousting him from the car, last seen drinking? Isaac telling her that it was the eulogy, her recovering the paper, reading the eulogy and the visuals of her life with Gus?

7. Hazel’s situation, at age 13, the diagnosis, the visits to the hospital, the treatments, the facts? Her parents and their love and support? Difficulties in breathing, the tubes in her nose, carrying her oxygen pack everywhere? Her life, the touches of cynicism? Going to the group, the leader and his talk about Jesus, the image of the Sacred Heart, the huge rug? The leader and his stories, the various testimonies, Isaac and his relationship with Monica, having lost an eye, about to lose his other eye and be blind? Gus present, for Isaac? His talking about oblivion? Hazel and her criticisms of his answer? Their meeting afterwards? Watching Isaac and Monica kissing – and the later abandoning of Isaac by Monica, their going to her house and pelting the car with eggs? The sharing of Hazel and Gus, the phone, talking, in the skeleton park, the children? Gus and the ICU? Going to Holland, the experience, the steps, the kiss, the sexual encounter, Gus a virgin? The meal with her mother, going for the walk, Gus telling her the truth about his illness?

8. Gus, as a character, his age, personality, cheerful and optimistic, the meetings, friendship with Isaac, sharing with Hazel, his story, the amputation, his artificial limb? Telling her the truth about his illness, dying? The sexual encounter and its effect? Asking Hazel to write the eulogy, inviting Isaac and Hazel to the church, giving the eulogy? In hospital, his mother, his death, the effect of the news Hazel? At the funeral, Hazel speaking, her grief?

9. The portrait of the parents, her mother and her concern, love and support, the visit to Holland, Hazel confronting her mother, her mother saying that Hazel wood still be alive in her house and that she would do good in counselling others in the same situation as herself? The sympathetic father?

10. Isaac, his eyes, Monica, at the sessions, his eulogy, at the funeral?

11. The character of Peter, the news of the death of his daughter, the writing of the novel, his drinking, seclusion, hostility, not answering correspondence, emailing Gus, coming to the funeral, delivering text of the eulogy? The devotion of the secretary?

12. The film facing the realities of illness, terminal illness, pain, hospitalisation, dedication, the need for friendship in love? The importance of being significant – Gus wanting to be remembered, Hazel assuring him that he would be remembered by her and how valuable that would be.

THIR13TEEN GHOSTS

US, 2001, 91 minutes, Colour.
F.Murray Abraham, Tony Shalhoub, Embeth Davidtz Shannon Elizabeth, Matthew Lillard, Alec Roberts.
Directed by Steve Back.

Thir13teen Ghosts is a remake of the 1950s film by William Castle. He was renowned for shock-horror with all kinds of gimmicks, in this case, glasses so that people could see the ghosts. The basic plot was about our haunted house, demonic uncle, and the plight of the family trapped in the house.

This film is very big on production design, especially the extraordinary machine-house, its glass walls, its central lock, opening and shutting doors… It is also big on special effects, principally for the ghosts, the visuals they represented, the attack of the ghosts.

F.Murray Abraham is the mad uncle. Tony Shalhoub is the nephew, Shannon Elizabeth his daughter, Alec Roberts his son. Matthew Lillard and Embeth Davidtz appear as experts.

A film for those who like weirdness in their horror.

1. A remake of the 1950s schlock-horror film?

2. The weirdness of the plot, the characters, the special effects, the ghosts in the confrontations?

3. Production values, the opening in the dead car lot? Cyrus’s glass house, a machine, the layout, the glass walls, the machinery and activities? The musical score?

4. The explanation of the ghosts, the number of ghosts, the importance of the 13th ghost? In league with Satan, the satanic activities of Cyrus, greed and power?

5. The opening, dark and sinister, Cyrus and his presence, Dennis and his power of touch and knowing the past and future, Kalina and her ghost-hunting? The death of Cyrus?

6. The comparative calm of Arthur and his family, his sitting and the panning shot, the death of his wife, the fire? His relationship with Kathy and Robert? Maggie present as the Nanny? The vitality of the family?

7. The role of the lawyer, the explanation of the will, the video of Cyrus and his explanations, the eagerness of the children, Arthur and his wariness? Signing the document?

8. Going to the house, their amazement, the impact of the visuals, their rooms? Arthur and the discussions with the lawyer, being persuaded to sign, his looking for the children, the disappearing?

9. The glasses, the visualising of the ghosts, the lawyer, his plans, his being killed, sliced?

10. Robert, his vitality, the scooter, going everywhere, being trapped? Kathy and her room, her delight, wandering the house? Maggie, a place with the family, eagerness, the house?

11. The attack of the ghosts, on each of the members of the family, seeing them with the glasses, not seeing them without? Arthur and his wanting to rescue the children? Their meeting, Kathy being dragged away? Maggie and going to the controls and pulling all the levers?

12. Cyrus, his appearance? His plans? Kalina and her explaining everything to the family, the details of the satanic plan? Discovering that she was subject to Cyrus, doing his work the?

13. The family confronting the ghosts, setting them free, Arthur’s wife and her plaintive presence?

14. The final conflagration, the collapse of the building, the machines, freedom of the family?