FIVE MAN ARMY/ UN ESERCITO DI 5 UOMINI

US/Italy, 1969, 100 minutes, Colour.
Peter Graves, James Daly, Nino Castelnuovo, Bud Spencer.
Directed by Don Taylor and Italo Zingarelli.

Five Man Army came during the popularity of spaghetti westerns. This one was co-written by Dario Argento, soon to become famous for his crime and horror films. It was produced and co-directed by Italo Zingarelli, with American Don Taylor as the nominal director.

The material is very familiar. There is a revolution in Mexico and the film opens with scenes of crowds in revolt, the presence of the army, the brutality of the army.

A young man, former acrobat, on the run from the army, goes to America to enlist the help of a veteran, Dutch, played by Peter Graves. He persuades Dutch to round up a force, including an army munitions expert, James Daly, and a tough, big wrestling type, played by Bud Spencer, so well-known from the Trinity westerns. There is also an quiet Japanese Samurai whose presence in the West is not entirely explained.

The group of bonds together and the plan is to rob a train. The money of the generals is on the train and is highly guarded. A good deal of the film is taken up with the pursuit of the train, infiltrating the train, the manoeuvres used to get the money and to escape.

Once the five man army has the money, there is a revolt as the men are deceived by Dutch who explains that he wants the money for himself, but for the revolution. After various tough interactions, the men finally agree that the money should go to the revolution.

The film does try to delineate something of the characters of the army, the confrontations with the Mexican military, the plight of the peasants – with a touch of romance is one of the local girls falls in love with the Samurai.

The film was co-directed by Don Taylor, initially an actor in such films as Father of the Bride and Naked City, but who in the 1950s made a transition to directing films and, especially, telemovies.

Nothing startling but probably enjoyable for Western fans and for those devoted to spaghetti westerns.

HOTEL RWANDA

US, 2005, 123 minutes, Colour.
Don Cheadle, Sophie Oekanado, Nick Nolte, Joaquin Phoenix, David O ’Hara, Jean Reno, Cara Seymour.
Directed by Terry George.

The last decade of the 20th century saw a genocide in Africa that was cruel and vicious, the heritage of tribal enmities that had been fostered by imperial colonising powers and that the world was slow in acknowledging and dealing with. Hotel Rwanda is a cry for justice to a world audience ten years after the events where Tutsis and Bwa were massacred by Hutus, stirred on by hatred. For those who hunger and thirst for justice, they may have to wait a long time before being satisfied.

The oracles of the book of Isaiah were spoken in the hindsight of the devastation of Jerusalem in 587 BC and the majority of the population of Judaea being taken into exile in Babylon. The text in chapter 58 focuses on fasting. However, it repeats the theme that fasting without justice makes no impression on God. Setting the oppressed free, breaking every yoke, sharing bread with the hungry, sheltering the oppressed and homeless, clothing the naked when you see them – this is what true religion is. The prophet also adds, ‘not turning your back on your own’.

This is what Paul Rusesabagina does when suddenly confronted by the Hutu uprising. A Hutu himself, he had a Tutsi wife, the mother of his children. In his role as the manager of the prestigious Kigali Milles Collines hotel, he moved amongst the local rich and famous as well as international visitors. A dapper man, he believed in good manners, efficient work and elegant style. His world is turned upside down.

His response, not a sudden overwhelming heroism, but a gradual response to ever-worsening situations, is the charity and justice that the scriptures exhort us to. He had to improvise, exert pressure where he could, try to maintain orderliness amongst the refugees in his hotel, help the Red Cross save children, negotiate with the United Nations officers, all the time emotionally anxious about his family. This is heroism in an ordinary man who never anticipated that his life would go in these directions.

It is probably a blessing for the commercial success of Hotel Rwanda that Don Cheadle and Sophie Okenado were nominated for acting Oscars, otherwise the film might have received very limited release. This happened with director Terry George’s moving film about IRA prisoners in the late 1970s, Some Mother’s Son. It was considered not commercial enough to warrant a promotion budget. Along with Raoul Peck’s quite similar, Sometimes in April, it offers an opportunity for a world audience to learn something about the 1994 genocide in Rwanda and learn lessons about compassion and the need for political will for help and intervention.

Shot principally in Rwanda, the film has an authentic look and feel, some of it with documentary vividness.
This is a particular focus on Paul, the manager of the Mille Collines Hotel and his helping refugees. Sometimes in April, directed by Raoul Peck is well worth seeing as a companion piece, along with Michael Caton Jones’ Shooting Dogs, also known as Beyond the Gates. It ranges far more broadly, especially with US policy and the aftermath ten years later. This is, rather, the story of an ordinary man who is asked to be more heroic than he ever imagined. His story is placed firmly in context so that we understand something of the uprising, the Hutu hatred of Tutsis (‘rebel cockroaches’), the urgings of hate radio, the slowness of the world to respond.

Don Cheadle (who can do comedy as well as con-man gangsters so well) is utterly persuasive as Paul. The audience experiences the action through complete sympathy with him. Sophie Okenedo is moving as his wife. A strong African cast gives authenticity and Nick Nolte (as UN leader) , Joaquin Phoenix (as a TV reporter) and Jean Reno (as the president of Sabena) give the film some international appeal.

It is harrowing to remember that such genocide and subsequent refugee movement could happen in the 1990s.


1. Audience knowledge of the events of 1994 in Rwanda? The atmosphere of the 1990s? Memories? The genocide, the presence of the United Nations force, the lack of intervention from other countries? The aftermath?

2. Western version of the events, for Western audiences? The response of Rwandans? An emotional film, for understanding, the horrors of the events? Western feelings of guilt about lack of intervention?

3. The period, the setting, Kigali, the hotel, homes, the world of the affluent, the world of the ordinary, of Rwandans in the villages?

4. The hotel, the streets, the country roads? The military presence? The mobs with machetes, their massacres? The visuals? The background score?

5. Audiences understanding of the Hutus, the Tutsis? The past history, the dominance of the Tutsis, the resentment of the Hutus? The uprising, the President, his death? The use of the radio, the propaganda speeches, the encouragement to kill, calling the Tutsis cockroaches? The influence and response?

6. The UN presence, insufficient, the dangers, the rescues, the leader and his discussions with Paul, taking the foreign visitors away? His regrets?

7. The hotel, Mille Colines, its status? Foreign ownership? Foreign management and expectations and standards? The range of guests? International? The staff, the style of the hotel?

8. The hotel, the experience of the uprising, the occupation by the military, the need for food, going to depots for stores? The military and their wanting alcohol? The use of alcohol and stores as bribes? The staff, military support? The safety for the Hutus? The UN and the evacuation? The rooms?

9. Paul, his family, his wife as Tutsi? Their children? The extended family? Their being under threat, the wife being strong? The attack, the military, Paul and his continually offering bribes, money, gifts? Putting his family in the hotel rooms? Going to the roof for safety?

10. The UN commander, his dilemmas, his helping, his being embarrassed, the rescues?

11. The media, Jack and David, in the hotel, the comfort, the women, their stories? Jack going out, getting the footage, seeing the cruelty, sending it to
America, the networks, the screening? Impact on not? Their not wanting to leave, having to leave?

12. The ousting of the Tutsis, the occupation of the hotel, the insolent staff member and his being forced to work? The role of the staff, Paul’s speech to them, urging them to cooperate? His going for the food, going to the depot, the deals, the threats – and the organiser being a Hutu leader for the massacres?

13. The effect of the attacks, the machetes, the mobs, the people lying dead on the roads, taking refuge in houses, the church, in schools? The continued radio propaganda?

14. The military leaders, in the hotel, Paul persuading them to consider their reputation and blame later? The good effect?

15. The offices of the hotel company in Belgium, the response of the Europeans? Belgium and the shock? The phone calls, the companies, their reputation, wanting to keep the hotel open, contact with governments, with the French, getting some help, insufficient? Paul and his pleading with the officials, the prospect of his being killed?

16. Paul, keeping the hotel going, getting his family out, in the trucks, his not going, his wife’s endearment reaction? The attack on the road, the killings in the truck, the return to the hotel? The aid worker and teacher, Paul persuading her to go to the village, finding the children but not the parents, bringing them to safety? Surviving?

17. The experience of anguish, of brutal deaths, of the reality genocide? The shock for the world in the 1990s? The Africa, United Nations, and the role of the world powers, their discussions in Congress and the United Nations? The aftermath for Rwanda, the court cases, the imprisonments, the extent of Hutu involvement – and the need for reconciliation?

28 HOTEL ROOMS

US, 2013, 80 minutes, Colour.
Chris Messina, Malin Ireland.
Directed by Matt Ross.

This is a film about a relationship, a relationship between and a man and woman who are not married to each other but have bonds to other people.

The structure of the film is to have 28 sequences, each in a hotel room, each starting with the number on the door. In a film of this brief length, each sequence is comparatively short. It is an impression, various pieces of a jigsaw, the relationship of characters who are simply called The Man and The Woman. They are played by Chris Messina who acts as Executive Producer of the film, and Malin Ireland.

The film begins graphically, an initial sexual encounter in the first of the rooms. Quite a number of the sequences are comparatively explicit with nudity, impressing on the audience the reality of this relationship, physical, emotional, psychological. But, the relationship is between two confused people, struggling to understand what is going on in their relationship, how it compares with their relationships beyond the hotel rooms.

To this extent, the film is interesting, has a sense of reality about it despite the contrivance of the meetings in the rooms, and makes the protagonists ask questions of themselves as well as challenging the audience.

The Man is an author, with a successful book, writing another which then receives bad reviews, although The Woman is very supportive. The Man has a number of relationships and partial commitments but does not marry. At the end, he settles down and becomes an English teacher in a college, something which he likes and enjoys.

The Woman is, in fact, married, and the audience wonders why she is in this relationship with The Man. At times, so does she. She is confused in her lack of self-confidence. Her career is in business, with figures and documents, giving advice, enabling her company to be efficient and to make money. This is something which The Man criticises in comparison with his own work where he tries to be creative.

The Woman is also very emotional, a great deal of laughing, giggling, quite an amount of crying, something which The Man acknowledges but his feelings are much more internal.

There is a great deal of tenderness in many of the love scenes, the physical communication, the emotional communication, the satisfaction of their being together, even just lying side by side. Frailties and vulnerablities. But, of course, there are moments of tension, The Woman not responding to the text messages that The Man sends, their snatching movements of intimacy which cannot always be planned.

The Woman often says that she loves her husband, not describing him in any detail, but sometimes a significant presence in their meetings. Then the woman becomes pregnant, has a baby girl, Emma, is concerned about her, even to making phone calls about babysitting.

This means that years pass, indicated sometimes by The Man growing the station or a beard, then clean-shaven. And the months of pregnancy and the birth of the daughter, and the touch that the woman might have liked to have had the baby with The Man.

The ending is inconclusive, as might be expected from this kind of dramatic exercise and exploration.

The film is a challenge for the audience, whether identifying with The Man or The Woman, approving of what happens between them, disapproving of their relationship, but an opportunity to reflect on the nature of sexuality, passion, love, fidelity and infidelity, commitment and partial commitment.

HAUNTED GOLD

US, 1932, 59 minutes, Black and white.
John Wayne, Jean Terry, Blue Washington.
Directed by Mack V. Wright.

This is a slight film, a western context but something of a haunted house scenario. Hence the title. The film is of interest only historically and because of its place in John Wayne’s career.

John Wayne had appeared in a number of westerns and made this one at the age of 25. These were his roles in the 1930s but his career changed with John Ford’s 1939 Stagecoach. During the 1940s, he was a prominent star in all kinds of genres, westerns, dramas, comedies, war films – and this was to continue throughout the 1950s and 1960s.

He plays the part owner of a goldmine but has never bothered to check out the mine until he receives a mysterious note, signed by The Phantom. When he arrived in the town, he finds a young woman whose father was a co-owner of the mine, some mysterious characters in an old mansion, as well as a gang of crooks, led by man whose father swindled the girl’s father out of his share in the mine. They have all been summoned by The Phantom – and, throughout the film, in the vein of haunted house films, a slide opens and eyes appear, looking at all that is going on.

Within the short space of time, there is some action, a touch of romance, the revelation of the mystery of The Phantom – the girl’s father having served a jail sentence has returned. There is a great deal of rough-and-tumble, John Wayne being tied up, falling down mineshafts, some action in a stunt on a trolley in mid-air, but this is 1932 and there are not so many precedents for this kind of thing. Wayne is amiable and a screen presence but it took a long time for him to make a broad impact.

Of greater interest in retrospect is the character of Clarence, Wayne’s sidekick, played by the African-American? actor, Blue Washington. A lot of his style is in the bug-eyed fear and shock mode popular at the time. He has a whole lot of slapstick comedy, being terrified by ghosts and phantoms. He is referred to by the thugs as “Darky” and is asked to wait outside in the hallway at times. However, despite the stereotypes, he has a significant role as Wayne’s partner and in the rescues, another step in the presentation of African-Americans? in American movies.

LET FREEDOM RING

US, 1939, 85 minutes, Black-and-white.
Nelson Eddy, Virginia Bruce, Edward Arnold, Lionel Barrymore, Victor Mac Laglan, Charles Butterworth, H.B. Warner,Guy Kibee, Raymond Walburn.
Directed by Jack Conway.

One wonders how this film was received in its time, after the depression, looking back on the history of the railroad, looking back at the capitalist bosses who exploited the workers, and released at the time of the outbreak of World War II in Europe. It is an odd experience for later audiences.

The principal reason for this is the presence of Nelson Eddy, so well-known as a singing partner with Jeanette Mac Donald in so many popular musicals of the 1930s, Naughty Marietta, Girl of the Golden West, Rose Marie, and partnering of stars like Ilona Massey and Eleanor Powell. On paper this is not a musical, it is rather a frontier story, of a big boss coming in to exploit the railroad, and buy people’s land, unscrupulously, setting fire to barns and paying low wages.

The film has a strong cast in its supporting roles, Edward Arnold always persuasive as an unscrupulous boss, Lionel Barrymore as the earnest fighter for rights, Charles Butterworth bringing some good humour into his role as Mackerel, a pianist but with an iron jaw when he challenges people for a dollar to punch him out and knock him out – but he always instantly rebounds. The Jesus of Cecil B. De Mille’s The King of Kings, H.B. Warner plays an unlikely character, a gentleman who runs the casino aspects of the local saloon, dignified but also handy with the gun. Virginia Bruce is the strong heroine. And Victor Mac Laglan is there, playing his usual tough role with Irish brogue and humour.

Into this context comes Lionel Barrymore’s son who has spent four years studying law at Harvard. He is expected to be the saviour of the community from the boss. However, when he returns, he goes through the play of siding with the boss, being in his good graces, doing his bidding – all of which bewilders and alienates his father, his girlfriend and the people in the town. His only confidante is Mackerel, the pianist, who helps him in his underground subversion of the boss, especially with the printing of a paper against the exploitation, which gets him the nickname of The Wasp. Because of his dedication, he is prepared for everyone to dislike him until the final revelation when everyone repents of their misjudging him.

This might be all right except that frequently, very frequently, Nelson Eddy finds the opportunity to burst into song. That makes the difference for this film. Obviously, he sings well, but the proportion of the songs on the action seems skewiff. On the side it offers an opportunity for some dancing, taken up with enthusiasm by Victor Mac Laglan. On the other side of the ledger, there are action sequences with Nelson Eddy, a bit of horseriding as well as a fisticuffs stoush with Mac Laglan.

The film ends with a confrontation in the hotel, the mine workers coming into support Nelson Eddy both being urged to go back to work by an ever more intolerant Edward Arnold. Just when it seems that the cause is lost, Virginia Bruce bursts into song, the patriotic song that stirs Americans and finishes with Let Freedom Ring.

The theme of the revolt against the exploitation by the railroad bosses is interesting in itself, but the style of the film makes it something of an odd experience.

TENACIOUS D AND THE PICK OF DESTINY

US, 2006, 93 mintues, Colour.
Jack Black, Kyle Gass, Ben Stiller, Amy Poehler, Tim Robbins
Directed by Liam Lynch.

Listening to the dialogue (or blocking it out as needs be), one wonders why the film was not called Tenacious F!

If you are with it, you will know that Tenacious D is a musical group with Jack Black and Kyle Gass. They have performed since the mid-90s, recorded quite a number of songs, done a television series of comic short programs and developed quite a name for themselves for irreverent satire and ‘attitude’.

Audiences who delight in and identify with cultural rebels with ‘attitude’ will relish the transition to the big screen (although some reviewers in the know have complained about various songs being left out and some of the comedy routines from the past).

Audiences not in the know may not be all that much wiser by the end of the film. They will realise that they have been watching two eccentric comedians doing their irreverent shtick, with more than touch of bodily function crassness and inhaling pot with literal grass roots results. The jokes and routines are a very mixed bag, a mixture of some hilarious bits, some corny bits, some crass bits and some really gross bits.

Since Jack Black has become a screen presence in the last six years or so, it is interesting to see him go back to his early career. He still has that devilish knowing-innocent look, a shrewd manipulator of his audience with some great timing and satire.

Oh, the pick of destiny? This is the complicated sub-plot (sub-pot!) to the story of the formation of Tenacious D and their ambitions. It involves a legend where the devil lost a tooth that became, through the centuries, the pick that galvanised the careers of Mozart and Mick Jagger amongst others (all of whom can be glimpsed in a visit to the Rock and Roll Museum). But, the devil wants his tooth back and deceives Tenacious D who have to learn to have faith in themselves (which is rather sweet and inspirational rather than promoting ‘attitude’).

A lot of music stars and actors pop in and out including Tim Robbins and a very effective turn by Ben Stiller who tells the tale of the pick of destiny. Actually, this may make it sound better than it really is.

THE MAGIC OF BELLE ISLE

US, 2012, 109 minutes, Colour.
Morgan Freeman, Virginia Madsen, Emma Fuhrmann, Madeline Caroll, Fred Willard, Kevin Pollack, Ash Christian.
Directed by Rob Reiner.

The Magic of Belle Isle is a summer story, a pleasant story about how a cranky alcoholic man could rediscover his real self. In many ways it seems a film for the family, for children, especially young girls, a film for parents. That is the tone of the title. However, it is also a serious film about the central character, his life, disability, his career, his collapse.

The film has beautiful settings, a town on water in upstate New York. It is something of a close community, the family next door, mother with three daughters, a mentally impaired young man with his mother up the street, a man who exercises and collapses, his rather dominating neighbour.

The presence and performance of Morgan Freeman, always an actor with great gravitas, with one of the best voices in Hollywood, beautifully articulated and modulated, and able to deliver rather rhetorical lines as if this is the way that everybody spoke. Here he is a celebrated author of western novels, with awards, who was stopped writing and is drinking continually. His earnest nephew has found him a place to live, the home of a man who looks after dogs. He has to look after the dog and there are many very amusing scenes as he talks with the dog, tries to train him. His nephew has brought his typewriter but he resists writing.

He is very agreeable with the town’s people, being forced to go to the wake of the man who died, and to read aloud the eulogy written by Fred Willard. He befriends the mentally impaired young man, inviting him to be his Western sidekick to his character of his novels, Jubal.

Of the main friendships the closest is with his next door neighbours, the O’Neill? family, with Virginia Madsen as a mother, divorced, with three young daughters. The focus is on the middle daughter, Finn, Emma Fuhrmann, who befriends the author and asks him to teach her how to make up stories – which he does, giving the film an added bonus about imagination and stories.

While the film does focus on ordinary lives and on ordinary difficulties, it is upbeat in its presentation, directed by Rob Reiner, who previously worked with Morgan Freeman on The Bucket List.

1. A genial film? Comic serious? For a family audience? The children, young girls? For adults?

2. The setting, Belle Isle, the water, the island, the town, the shops, homes? Ordinary American city? The musical score?

3. The film anchored in the performance by Morgan Freeman, his screen presence, gravitas, the strength of his voice, articulation, the scenes of his reading and telling stories?

4. Monty, grouchy, with his nephew Henry, moving into the house, grumbling, his wit and ironic humour, having to look after the dog, settling into the house?
His continued drinking? His being hard on his nephew, not answering the phone to his agent? Settling in for the summer? The amusing scenes with the dog?

5. The O’Neill? family, Charlotte, the separation from her husband, his disregard for his daughters? The phone calls, ringing to say that he would not be coming to Flora’s birthday party, Willowtree and her wanting to be with her father? Life at the O’Neill’s?, cheerful, Willowtree as the moody teenager, wanting to be in the city, disliking the house at the lake, their having to live there? Her mother’s family’s house? The interactions with each other, games, throwing water, Charlotte on the roof because of the impending fire? Their meeting with Monty?

6. Monty and his getting the one dollar shuttle to the shop, discussions with the man behind the counter, buying the alcohol, the comment on what should be on the counter? His watching the people, Carl, a big man yet his mental impairment, at home with his mother? The man doing exercise – and his collapse and death? The friendly man and his continued talk, talk over people, inviting Monty to the wake, getting him to read the eulogy? Finn and her mother at the wake?

7. Monty, his reputation, his books, his award, westerns? His identifying with his character of Jubal? His giving up writing? Henry bringing the typewriter?

8. The encounter with him, Finn’s stories, saying that he ate worms, her wanting to write stories, explaining imagination, what she saw on the road, what she did not see? Her money for the lessons? Continually coming, his asking her to imagine the story, the little girl on the shore, being followed, eluding the man, getting the police? Her gradually understanding imagination? Telling her mother the chosen words, imagination, bamboozle, mentor?

9. Monty, the dinner at their home, his being comfortable, with the girls, Charlotte playing Beethoven, the attraction, his later dreaming about Charlotte dancing with her, kissing her, her music as the communication with him?

10. Flora, the birthday, painting his face, the clown and his bad mood, the collapse of his stand, Monty pulling the gun? His giving Flora the story about elephants, her mother reading it, Tony the elephant, his writing further stories? Finn upset at the stories?

11. The visit of his agent, the actor who wanted to portray Jubal on screen, Monty not ready to sell the rights? The pleasant actor?

12. Charlotte and the building of the raft, the children going to the island, finding their mother’s tin of letters and diary? Willowtree and reading the diary, understanding and mother, the divorce, the reconciliation with her mother, working with her in the garden? Friends at school?

13. Charlotte going to the city, the divorce papers, Monty minding the girls, the swimming, the girls trying to teach him how to text? His telling in the story of his life, playing baseball, the accident, Mary, confined to the chair, Mary supporting him, her death from cancer, his stopping writing, his drinking?

14. Going off the drink, take it back to the store?

15. Carl, his bunny hop, with his mother, her asking Monty to telephone him, Monty doing so? Calling Carl Diego and his being his offsider? And finally Carl being able to be himself?

16. Monty going, the farewells? The message, his buying the house, returning – and a happy ending?

OUTSIDE PROVIDENCE

US, 199 9, 97 minutes, Colour.
Shawn Hatosy, Amy Smart, Jonathan Brandis, Gabriel Mann, Alec Baldwin, George Wendt, Richard Jenkins, Tommy Bone, Jon Abrahams.
Directed by Michael Corrente.


Outside Providence comes from a novel by screenwriter and director, Peter Farrelly (Dumb and Dumber, Kingpin, There’s Something about Mary which were made at this time). It was directed by Michael Corrente, director of such films as American Buffalo, Brooklyn Rules, with Alec Baldwin in another interesting performance. Shawn Hatosy was emerging as a teenage actor at this time and was to go on to have successful career, not as a star, but as a character actor in such films as Alpha Dog. Amy Smart was also at the beginning of her career. However, Alec Baldwin often steals the show as the less educated father, proud of his son the calling him Dildo, sending him to preppy high school and then hoping that he would go to college, the first in the family. Tommy Bone portrays the younger brother, injured in an accident and confined to a wheelchair.

Shawn Hatosy as Tim has a whole range of friends back in town. He has a different range of friends at school. But his father also has his group of friends, always seen playing cards together, with such character actors as George Wendt and Richard Jenkins.

The film is set in the 1970s and is the perspective on the 70s from the 1990s.

1. A coming-of-age film? Different? The 1970s seen by the 1990s?

2. The title, locations, Rhode Island, Connecticut, the ordinary seaside town, the Preppy public school? Musical score?

3. The focus on Tim, his age, his brother Jackie, his relationship with his father, with the card-players? Friendly, his group, layabouts? Drugs and drinking? Relationship with girls? The friends and their activities, lack of ambition, the incidents?

4. Tim’s father, calling his son Dildo, tough, love for his sons, his treatment, offhand? Lack of education, vocabulary? Memories of his wife, her suicide? His revealing this gradually to Tim? Playing card with his friends, their talk, the big discussion about homosexuality, jokes, his attitude towards his son’s education, going to college, the holidays home? The graduation, the application for the local college? An interesting character?

5. The range of friends, the card games, the jokes, their work, the issue about homosexuality, picking on Joey?

6. Tim at school, out of place, the atmosphere, arriving at the speeches, his roommate singing the song and his embarrassment? Classes, Tim and his intelligence, self-confidence? Jack Wheeler, friendship, the drugs, causing trouble, the clash with him at the end? Reporting him to the teacher? His meeting with Jane, the explanation, the attraction, going out?

7. Jane, her family, wealth, giving him the lift, the holidays and going to Tim’s house, the drugs, her desire to go to Brown, being found out, reported by Jack Wheeler, the rejection from Brown?

8. Tim, his going to the dean at Brown, getting in the window, the argument, awkward, yet his success?

9. Jackie as a shrewd and intelligent youngster? In the wheel chair? Covering for Tim with their father?

10. The character of Jack Wheeler, his place in the school, friendship, drugs, betrayal?

11. The other friends at school? The graduation, the teacher who picked on him, refusing to shake his hand?

12. The range of friends at home, the letter and its being read out, moving away from home or not? Changes? Tim and his future?

GRACE OF MONACO


US/France, 2014, 102 minutes, Colour.
Nicole Kidman, Tim Roth, Frank Langella, Parker Posey, Paz Vega, Derek Jacobi, Robert Lindsay, Milo Ventimiglia, Geraldine Sommerville, Nicholas Farrell, Jeanne Balibar, Roger Ashton- Griffiths.
Directed by Oliver Dahan.

It is somewhat embarrassing for a reviewer to say that this film was enjoyable, embarrassing in the face of almost universal critical condemnation. But, I found it both interesting and enjoyable. Perhaps this is because of the presence of Grace Kelly in one’s consciousness and in her films, memories of seeing the films at the time, remembering the occasion of her wedding. Maybe those not familiar with Grace Kelly or her films will see this as something of a fiction which they can take or leave. In fact, the film does begin with a statement that, while it is based on events, it is a fictional interpretation.

The film shows the build-up to the 1956 wedding of Grace Kelly with Prince Rainier of Monaco, with some footage of the actual ceremony itself shown later. Most of the action takes place in 1961-1962.

For Princess Grace herself, there was the dilemma of whether she should go back to Hollywood and appear in of Alfred Hitchcock’s Marnie. At the beginning of this film, Hitchcock himself comes to Monaco to discuss the role with his friend, Gracie, leaves a script with her which she studies, and rehearses a number of ways to interpret a sequence in front of her mirror. The issue becomes political, whether the people of Monaco, wary of their American princess, would approve of her going back to Hollywood, and whether European royalty would approve of the same thing. This leads the film into the political issues of the period.

At this time, President De Gaulle was waging war in Algeria and needed finances for this war effort. One of the ways for doing this, along with a number of other political reasons and financial issues, was to impose taxes on independent Monaco. The small nation itself was financially strapped and could not afford the taxes. Rainier was offering a number of French companies tax havens in his country, while so many French visited Monaco for its financial benefits in the casinos. Rainier himself, while marrying an American, was very strong on the traditions of the Grimaldi family, ruling in Monaco since the 13th century. He had somewhat stern European expectations of women and wives.

The film shows Grace with two of her children, the tensions with her husband, the issue of Marnie and her status in Monaco. Negotiations for the wedding, in this very Catholic principality, were entrusted to the American priest, Father Francis Tucker. He played a significant role in Monaco. He was Grace’s confidante, especially urging her to acknowledge the role she had to play as wife, mother and Princess of Monaco, role-playing and acting if she must. He also urged her to study the protocols and rules and regulations as well as perfect her French and her style and poise.

The drama of the film, apart from the relationship between husband and wife, is how to deal with De Gaulle and a blockade against Monaco. In the screenplay, Grace uses her shrewdness to attract the aristocratic women of Monaco and their work for the Red Cross to hold a ball to which she invited world leaders – and De Gaulle accepted. (The ball took place in October 1962 at the time of the Cuban crisis for the United States and at the time of the opening of the Second Vatican Council.)

The political intrigue is interesting even if the solution is probably simplified and glamorised.

But, so much of the interest in the film is in Nicole Kidman’s performance as Princess Grace. Some critics have complained that Nicole Kidman does not look like Princess Grace or act like her but, I was happily convinced to accept her. Tim Roth is an interesting choice for Rainier, seem mostly in preoccupation about his political situation. Frank Langella is quietly persuasive as Father Tucker. Parker Posey does severity personified as the regulator of protocols within the Palace – and caught up in an interesting subplot as to whether somebody in the Palace was undermining the family and negotiating with De Gaulle. Derek Jacobi gives a rather enthusiastically camp performance as the count who instructs the Princess in the ways of protocol.

Of course, the film looks very good, with scenes of the city itself, the Palace, the beautiful Mediterranean coastal cliffs. And, those with an eye to fashion, will be looking at all the creations for Nicole Kidman.

Audiences may have forgotten, but Cheryl Ladd appeared long since in a film entitled, Grace Kelly (1983), allegedly approved just before her death, a film that ends with the wedding. Comparisons have been also made with Diana, with Naomi Watts impersonating the Princess. I would prefer this film.

1. Audience interest in and knowledge of Grace Kelly? As an actress? As Princess of Monaco? Of her political activities? Charitable activities? Her life in the 1960s?

2. The production values, filming in Monaco, the views of the city on the coast, the Palace and the interiors? The blend of the romantic with the political? The musical score, operatic themes?

3. The cast, Nicole Kidman and her interpretation of Grace Kelly, Tim Roth and his interpretation of Prince Rainier?

4. The background of Grace Kelly’s life, her wealthy father, his building up an industry? Her mother, her sister and her talents and her father’s comparisons of Grace with her sister? Filming To Catch a Thief in Monaco and the Riviera? The filming of High Society and the end of her career, the studio sequence? Romance with Prince Rainier, the lavish wedding, their children, her life in Monaco?

5. The situation in 1962, political, the clash between Monaco and France, president De Gaulle and wanting the taxes, a blockade on Monaco? The background of world events the time, the Cuban crisis? The role of Europe?

6. The film introduced as a fictional interpretation of events? How much fiction, how much fact, interpretation?

7. Grace Kelly as an actress, her career in Hollywood, Oscar, finishing her career with High Society? Her relationship with Hitchcock, the several films? His visit, the script for Marnie, the discussion, the rehearsing the role to the mirror, the wanting to do the film, the withholding of the press release, political manoeuvrings, its being leaked in Hollywood, the hype, audience interest, the people of Monaco considering her as an American wanting to go back to America?

8. Grace Kelly by 1961, the children, trapped in the situation, an American not particularly liked, the background of her own family (and the phone call to her mother and the inability to have an ordinary conversation and her mother saying that Grace’s father would be turning in his grave)? Rainier and his being busy, the tensions, the situation for her, Hitchcock’s offer, the dilemma, Rainier and his modified approval? Grace and her missing this aspect of her life and career?

9. Monaco, old, since the 13th century, the Grimaldi family, the buildings, resisting invasions? No taxes? The role of the casinos? Businesses coming to Monaco for tax relief? The deals? France and the war in Algeria, De Gaulle wanting taxes, the threats, the visits to Monaco and the hardline French, embargoes and blockades? Rainier and his difficulties handling the situation?

10. The picture of the French politicians, insulting Grace and her children, Rainier punching the representative? The negotiations? The presence of Aristotle Onassis, his advice to Rainier?

11. Grace, Madge and the insistence on protocol, instructing Hitchcock? The details, the language, the poise? Grace being supervised?

12. Grace, her children, playing, lessons, sometimes a meal with the whole family?

13. Antoinette, her husband and his advice, this son? The revelation that they were plotting against Rainier, financial deals, this son as the Prince and the mother as Regent?

14. Father Frank Tucker, his role as a priest, being in Monaco 15 years, his part in the search for Rainier’s wife, persuading the Kelly’s, Grace? His role in Monaco, advice? The politics? In himself, Grace’s confidante? His concern about grace’s education, supervising with the count, his correspondence, asleep and Grace reading the letter, his decision to leave Monaco, the interest of the Vatican? His returning to the US? The role of the church? The Archbishop of Monaco seen at state dinners? A Catholic family?

15. Rainier, his personality, expectations of him, as a European, member of royalty, chauvinist in his attitude towards women and his wife, political demands? Coping, negotiations, the advice of his council? The difficulties of the situation, his being prepared to surrender? The shock revelations about his sister?

16. The scene with the Red Cross, Grace visiting the hospital, the women and their disdain for Grace? The Countess and her role, lack of money, concern about the annual Red Cross ball? Grace and her idea, changing, getting the women on side, the visit to Paris, the press conference outside Cartier, the invitations, even to De Gaulle? De Gaulle debating whether to go or not, not being afraid of the American actress? The fact the Robert McNamara? was going to represent the United States?

17. The interlude with Maria Callas, her relationship with analysis, the horse riding, the discussions, the discussions about career and Callas maintaining her singing?

18. The count, his knowledge of protocol and style, his books, supervising Grace, the lessons in French and pronunciation, lessons in posture? Frank Tucker being present?

19. Madge, her role in the house, prim and prissy? Supervision? Suspicion of her as the plant for France? Grace’s confidante and the press manager, following Madge, seeing her contact? Discovering that she was suspicious, her hiring a private detective, the documents, the photos, showing them to Grace, Rainier walking in, his shock? The confrontation with Antoinette and her husband, her dominance, his being quiet? Their being exiled? Their son provided for? The husband and his having to phone France, the deception? Their having to be present at the ball, and go through the motions of loyalty?

20. Grace and Frank, their discussions, his talking about her roles, her having to make the decision, to be a role model for her children, to commit herself to Rainier and her life in Monaco? Her sitting and watching the footage of her wedding and its effect on her?

21. The ball, Grace and her gown and hair style, visitors arriving, De Gaulle and the French, protocols, the lavish party? Her arrival, meeting the people, autographs, popularity? Her speech and the applause? De Gaulle being beaten? The theme of her speech of peace without guns?

22. The consequences, Rainier, Grace and her family, her position in style, a prominent figure in Europe?

D3: THE MIGHTY DUCKS

US, 1996, 100 minutes, Colour.
Emilio Estevez, Jeffrey Nordlinger, Joshua Jackson, Heidi Kling, Joss Ackland, David Selby.
Directed by Robert Lieberman.

For those who enjoyed the previous two Mighty Ducks films, this may prove an enjoyable conclusion. For those who felt that the sequels were simply opportunities to increase the franchise, there may be some satisfaction, but this may seem a fairly weak ending.

Emilio Estevez is missing from most of the film, having a new job which takes away from the team but still being their lawyer. He is missed. The the ducks have been successful for four years and are now teenagers. They get a scholarship as a group to the preparatory school, Eden Hall, where their team-mate, Adam Banks, is studying.

They clumsily arrive at an assembly, making a commotion on stage as speeches are given. This is symbolic of their presence in the school. The preppy students in the Varsity basketball team are hostile to the arrival of the Ducks. There is a lot of expected slinging off and confrontation, especially with Charlie as the leader, now almost grown up and taking strong stances.He is once again played by Joshua Jackson who was about to go to the television series, Dawson’s Creek. Some of the other members of the team have grown up, including Fulton, the expert hitter, played by Eldon Henson.

The Ducks settle in, keeping to themselves, clashing with Varsity, whose leader has his father as a member of the staff (David Selby). For the Ducks, Hans is still available (Joss Ackland) but he dies during the film and there is a sad funeral.

A lot of the film is taken up with pranks and revenge. The Varsity team go to dinner at an expensive restaurant but hand over the bill to the Ducks, which is over $800. Countering this, the ducks play sabotage with the rooms of the Varsity students, using ropes which jerk them all around. These pranks take up a good part of the film.

The rest of the film is about succeeding at basketball, and of aiming at eating the defeating the Varsity team. Initially, they are hostile to their new coach, Jeffrey Nordlinger, but, with the advice of Gordon Bombay, and the encouragement of Hans, they come to work well with the new coach.

Need less to say, the finale is the match, with difficulties, with heroism, and victory – and the end of the film series.