THE HUNGER GAMES: CATCHING FIRE

US, 2013, 145 minutes, Colour.
Jennifer Lawrence, Josh Hutcherson, Donald Sutherland, Philip Seymour Hoffman, Woody Harrelson, Elizabeth Banks, Stanley Tucci, Liam Hemsworth, Jena Malone, Jeffrey Wright, Amanda Plummer.
Directed by Francis Lawrence.

It is important to advise audiences intending to see The Hunger Games: Catching Fire that it won’t have much impact if they have not seen the initial film. This sequel, the second in the series, takes for granted the characters and actions from the first film.

Audiences familiar with Suzanne Collins’ books were pleased with the film version of The Hunger Games. And many audiences, and critics, were surprised to find how well done the film was and how interesting and entertaining. They won’t be disappointed with Catching Fire.

Although this film runs for almost 2 ½ hours, the filmmakers have relied on audience memory. For instance, there was huge fanfare to introduce the contestants, the tributes from the 12 districts, who would fight in the hunger games, television interviews, lavish costumes, dramatic introductions with spectacle. There is something of this in Catching Fire, but we remember the first film and supply the atmosphere which means that, for the budget, there is only a small presentation of the contestants this time. It is the same with showing the television audience with its costumes, make up, and intense reaction to the contestants.

The familiar characters are back, the opening with Katniss and Gale Hawthorne back in district 12, with the prospect of a victory tour around the districts for the victors of the games. She and Peeta are unwilling. But, there is unease in the districts, the oppressed populations signalling possibilities of revolution. The President, Donald Sutherland, is also scheming to use Katnisss to promote popularity for himself and for the capital. He wants her to foster her public relationship with Peeta, the populace identifying with her in her (alleged and publicised) romance.

The previous organiser of the games has been executed because of his failure to produce an outcome. The new organiser is played by Philip Seymour Hoffman. He collaborates with the President in new games, especially designed for the 75th anniversary of the uprising, with the smart idea that there be no new tributes to fight but rather the previous victors from the various districts participate again.

Which means that for the second part of the film, we have a repeat of Hunger Games, but in quite a different format, dangers, deaths, interesting but a greater spirit of collaboration between some of the contestants. There are some interesting special effects for the dangers and the threats during the games.

Jennifer Lawrence, who, between the two films, won an Academy Award for her performance in The Silver Linings Playbook, is still a strong presence as Katniss. Challenged in her ability for personal relationships, she nevertheless is a sympathetic warrior. Josh Hutcherson is back as Peter, sharing the victory to with Caithness, and showing some smartness in his dealings with the manoeuvres of the President. Liam Hemsworth has a few more appearances this time as the man from the district who loves Katniss. It is a great pleasure to see Woody Harrelson back as the former victor and coach, Haymitch and Elizabeth Banks as the fey and fashion-conscious, Effie Trinket, still managing the victors. And Stanley Tucci once again relishes his role as the hyper-enthusiastic manipulative television compere.

As with the second films in most trilogies, this is a bridging story, anticipating the revolution that must come in the third film, Mockingjay.

The Hunger Games was very successful in novel form. It is very successful in film form. Audiences will be looking forward to the completion of the trilogy.

1. The success of the original film? Popularity? Critical? Audiences identifying with the characters and situations?

2. Suzanne Collins, the young adult audience, the adaptation of the novels, plots and characters? Situations, language?

3. The sequel assuming the first film, no further explanations? Assuming the response to the characters?

4. The Hunger Games world, the uprising 75 years earlier, power in the Capital, the President and his government? Autocracy? The districts and oppression? The effete and comfortable society? The role of television, the power of the compere, the love the pageantry, costume and make up? Spectacle? The games themselves, gladiatorial, the introductions and pageantry, the post-victory tour, morale boosting? yet the seeds of revolution?

5. Katniss at the centre, her age, experience, with Liam, the opening with the hunting and arrows, time for the tour, the plan for the two, leaving home, leaving Liam, Peeta and his being ready? Her surviving the initial games, the love the Peeta, made public, important for the tour, the support of her family, especially her sister? Her mother?

6. The President, his visit, his plans, trying to persuade Katniss, her reaction, his threats, danger for her family, wanting her to convince him of her love for Peeta?

7. The two, the train, Haymatch and Effie? Their role in the past? Effie, her style, grooming, chaperone for the two? The travel on the train? The crowds? The squares and the photos of the dead tributes? Katniss and her speeches, for morale, the cliches, the signs of revolution, the hand gestures? The soldiers intervening, confronting even Katniss, the soldier being persuaded to step back? The President unhappy?

8. Plutarch, Seneca dead because of his failure in the games? Plutarch as adviser, sinister, discussions with the President, persuading the President, having some control, decision-making, the dense, with Katniss and talking with her, his inventions for the dangers of the games? His control of the timing and holding back the President? Katniss and her recovery, discovering Plutarch, and his subversive role?

9. The calling of the Games? Only the past victors to participate? The lottery, the announcements, Haymatch and Peeta volunteering in his place? The attempts to protect Katniss? Sam, the old lady, the older couple and his technical skills, the aggressive couple, the giant contestant, Jane?

10. Going to the Capital, in the train, the luxury? The costume designer, coming again to help Katniss, the dress, the fire, supporting her, his arrest in being taken away?

11. The television compere, the audience, the applause? His grin, his teeth, sensationalising things, his gossip? Controlling the audience? The announcement of the engagement? Is later comments during the games? Sinister character despite his smile?

12. The contestants being present, the procession, the dress of fire, the interviews, Katniss and her personal dress? The response of the crowds?

13. The training, honing skills, making alliances amongst the contestants?

14. The games starting, there being monitored, the television watching, the cannon shots of announcing the death of the contestants?

15. Katniss impeded together, the dangers, Peeta and his being wounded, almost dying, Sam and his helping with the revival? Jane and her anger, yet helping? The older couple, the technology?

16. The dangers of the Games, the baboons in their pursuit, the poison smoke and its transforming the contestants, then needing water for the blisters to disappear? The lightning in the storms? The lake, working out that it was a clock, the timing of the attacks, working out how to survive?

17. The couple, the death of the wife? The couple and the giant attacking? Jane and her help?

18. The ferocity of the baboons, the chases, the pervasive fumes, the contestants running, the old lady sacrificing herself, to save Sam carrying her? The storms and lightning?

19. Katniss, her independence, trust, the trust in Sam? The plan, the fuse, to cut down the electricity, it’s being cut off, disaster?

20. The failure, the danger, Katniss and their seeming to lose?

21. Her waking, Plutarch present, the President, the siege of revolution? The future?

22. Young audiences interested in this kind of heroics, totalitarian society, survival, challenge, revolution?

THE GILDED CAGE

France, 2013, 90 minutes, Colour.
Rita Blanco, Joaquim de Almeida.
Directed by Ruben Alves.


This is one of those French comedies which are light on the surface but have something to say underneath. Perhaps it should be stressed that this is a combination of French and Portuguese comedy, the central characters, husband and wife, who migrated from Portugal 30 years earlier and have worked in Paris ever since, bringing up their children as Brazilians and French. The director is Portuguese and is visualising his memories and experiences.

The Gilded Cage has proven itself a box-office winner in Europe, where audiences will identify with the situations in these two diverse countries of the European Union. It travels beyond Europe quite nicely but, probably, without the strong impact that it had there.

The focus is on a middle-aged couple, very well played by Rita Blanco and Joaquin de Almeida. We see the wife jauntily walking along a street, greeting everyone, and then we find that she is the concierge in an apartment block, at the beck and call of an elderly woman whose life is governed by whims, by a Chinese resident, by a couple with twins. She loves work and does not feel imposed on though that is what has happened to her for 30 years. Her husband works for a building construction company and he, in his turn, has been imposed on by the CEO of the company. They have two children, young adults.

Then something happens which transforms their lives, offering them the freedom that they have never experienced, and the possibility of returning to Portugal. The wife’s sister, wanting to set up a Portuguese restaurant in Paris, certainly does not want her sister to go back home and fabricates a story about her very ill husband who needs all kinds of help. And the residents of the apartments certainly do not want her to go, thinking that they could not manage without her. It is the same with the boss of the company, devising ways of making it impossible for his worker to leave him.

Then there is the complication of the son not wanting to leave Paris, and pretending to friends that he is well-to-do, ashamed of his parents, as well as the daughter being in love with the son of the construction boss.

Comedy is to the fore as the couple toy with the idea of being wealthy and trying to keep up with their more affluent friends, especially a meal with all its disruptions, something that the French do so well. Needless to say, there are plenty of crises, especially with the younger generation and the couple’s friends. The daughter’s crisis is beautifully resolved when she goes with her fiancé to a Portuguese restaurant and listen to a singer with a beautiful ballad about Portugal.

Where there’s a will there’s a way – and the trouble started with a will. However, where there’s goodwill there is also a good way and that is how it all ends up, cheerfully and everyone together.


1. The popularity of the film in Europe, European sensibilities? Sensibilities beyond Europe for this European story?

2. The director, his Portuguese background, living in France, family experience, communicating his perspective?

3. Paris, the apartments, streets, the building sites, the restaurants? The contrast with Portugal, the vistas, the river, the property? Everybody in Portugal at the end? The musical score, the song in the restaurant and its emotion?

4. The introduction to the mother, walking along the street, everybody greeting her, discovering that she was the concierge? The haughty woman and her demands? Her mother’s dress? The Chinese man and his machines? The family with the twins and getting them ready for school? Cleaning, cooking, yet her loving her work? Being imposed on for 30 years?

5. Her own home, a loving relationship with her husband, his going to the building site, working with the men, the boss and the discussions, his loving his work? It being imposed on?

6. The daughter, a relationship with her parents, a relationship with the sum of the boss? Keeping it secret? Their meetings, discussions, sexual relationship, her pregnancy, telling him, his happy response? Her brother and he is staying at home? Relationship with his parents, ashamed of them?

7. The will, the reading, the reactions, the property, the company, being rich? The brother dying and the silence the 30 years? The requirements of the will, the demands, the deadlines?

8. Rosa, the wife’s sister, that visiting, chatting? Rosa and her work at the boss’s family home? Relationship with the members of the family? The sister, loud, imposing, wanting the money for a restaurant, her husband being idle, her lying about her husband’s health?

9. The company boss, his wife, son, losing money, the issue of contracts and deals, his needing for his work to stay? The offer of a raise?

10. The apartment block, the residents and their forming the board, their judgements on their concierge, the meetings, thinking that she must go? Yet their relying completely on her?

11. The couple going to the hotel, the comfort, their being uncomfortable, coming home? The husband testing out the expensive car? And whether it could take a trailer?

12. The daughter, her relationship, her pregnancy, her joy? The announcement of the engagement? The son, holding the party what his parents away, it getting out of hand, ashamed of his mother with the girl, the girl meeting his father and misinterpreting him as an art painter? The father’s response and his son’s embarrassment?

13. The dinner, the special preparation of the meal, the veal, when the guests were expecting cod? The couple dressing up, the others casual? The toasting the engagement? The sister, her tantrum, the truth? The shock of the parents about their daughter? The resident and her wanting the husband to come and fix things during the meal? The boss’s wife, drinking, carrying on and sending her away?

14. The couple and their agreeing to tell the truth, their bluntness to the residents, to the boss? Their talking with each other, whether they wanted to go to Portugal not, the mother missing her children and grandchildren?

15. Charles, morose, the shower, Rosa telling him where his fiancee was? His going to the apartment, his anger, finding the kind couple who were sheltering his fiancee? Talk, going to the restaurant, the mood of the Portuguese song? His learning Portuguese?

16. The scenes in Portugal, the beautiful countryside, everybody arriving, the pregnant daughter, the guests, the meal and everybody happy?

THE FIFTH ESTATE

UK/US, 2013, 128 minutes, Colour.
Benedict Cumberbatch, Daniel Bruehl, Morris Bleibtreu, Carice van Houten, Stanley Tucci, Laura Linney, David Thewlis, Dan Stevens, Peeta Capaldi, Anthony Mackie.
Directed by Bill Condon.

A film about Julian Assange. It is presumed that everybody knows who he is and what he has done.

Some key quotes from the film: “a mad prophet who needs boundaries”, “a manipulative asshole”, “a media empire that is accountable to no one”, and Assange himself says at one stage “I dangle at the edge of autism”. They are useful in helping the audience to assess Assange as a person, his personal relationships, his relationship with those who worked with him, his technical skills, the work of Wik iLeaks, and the changes in attitude from 2007 to 2009. There is also a mention of “ego”.

Already in 2012-2013, there were two films made about Assange. One was a television film, Underground, made in Australia by Robert Connolly, about Assange and his family life, and the initial hacking into official American sites. It ended when he was about 20. Then there was the extensive documentary by Alex Gibney, We Steal Secrets: The Story of Wiki Leaks. The Fifth Estate runs parallel to the Gibney documentary in its presentation of Assange.

The film opens in 2009 with the release of extensive documents which embarrassed many governments around the world, especially the United States, but also officials in such countries as Kenya, with stories of corruption and killings. The film then moves back to 2007, Assange and the beginnings of Wik iLeaks, his attempts to make his work public, his finding Daniel Schmitt (in fact, Daniel Berg) who shared his idealism, worked constantly with him at great personal cost and financial cost in the early years of Wik iLeaks.

Benedict Cumberbatch bears a significant resemblance to Assange and is made up accordingly, especially his white hair, which he makes something of in passing but which emerges as something the children in the sect to which he belonged as a child had to do. He is imperious in his manner, brooking no position opposition. He severely lacks interpersonal skills, riding roughshod over people in word and manner. But he does persuade people to share his vision, to become volunteers, to staff the sites, to protect them, and so not reveal sources for Wiki Leaks and the whistleblowing.

Daniel Bruehl is very good as Schmitt, serving as Assange’s anchor and checking fact and fiction. Moritz Bleibtreu is Marcus, friend of Schmitt, a hacking expert who is able to protect Wiki Leaks. However, it is well known that Assange fell out with Schmitt, dismissing him, accusing him of disloyalty. Then, it was his Schmitt’s decision, along with his hacking friend, to close down Wiki Leaks.

Audiences will be on side with Assange in the early years, especially as he reveals the conspiracies and atrocities in Kenya, and, especially, as he reveals the footage of helicopter pilots in Iraq gunning down innocent civilians as well as a Reuters correspondent. This brings him to the notice of the American State Department and the CIA, officials in the film played by Stanley Tucci, Laura Linney, Anthony Mackie.

With the extraordinary documents coming through, thousands of them, about American activity in Afghanistan, supplied by Bradley Manning who is briefly seen in newspaper photographs in the film, the newspapers become involved, especially Germany’s Der Speigel, the United States New York Times, the British Guardian.

This brings to a head the conflict with some of Assange’s friends and himself, his principle of publishing everything, while others urged a redaction of the documents, removing personal names for the safety of informers. There is a scene to illustrate this with a contact from Libya whose name is published and who has to escape to Egypt and to the US with his family.

The film raises issues of ethics in publication, the need for truth, for honest expression, but with more nuances than Assange wants to think about. This brings him into conflict, not only with governments, but with some of the editors of the newspapers. He is warned that there will be publicity against him, all kinds of rumours circulated, and audiences are familiar with the accusations of sexual misconduct in Sweden.

The film ends with some discussion by the British about Assange, his ambitions, and the availability of all news instantly online, the new fifth estate. This is a film which will divide audiences, upset those who favour Assange (and this was true of Assange himself who contacted Benedict Cumberbatch urging him not to do the film) and those who might have favoured him initially but who, like his associates, found him to autocratic, an extraordinary controller of every aspect of Wiki Leaks, and, one is tempted to use the word, a narcissist.

But, in his work is in the public domain, he is a celebrity-figure of his own making, a crusader who did a lot of good, and ambitious man who, as the film ends, and at the time of the film’s release, is still resident in the Ecuadorian embassy in London. While the story will be continued, it has been stalled a long time inside that embassy.

1. The meaning of the title? The explanation, new media, communication, accountability – to know one?

2. Audience knowledge of Julian Assange? Of Wiki Leaks? Stances on the principles, the experience of Wiki Leaks, the consequences?

3. The perspective of the films writers and director? The acceptance of Assange? Appreciation of his work? His revelations? Protecting whistleblowers? Time passing, his methods, the material coming in, becoming more autocratic? His reliance on Daniel? The information from Bradley Manning? His decisions about the Afghanistan documentation, publishing the truth at all cost, a principal? Node nuances in his approach to documents? The paranoid touch or not? The film is based on books critical of Assange

4. the style of the film, places and dates? Editing, pace? A more contemporary style of filmmaking?

5. The events of 2009, the revelations, Daniel and his role, others present, the presentations, the acclaim, the American response, President Obama and Hillary Clinton?

6. The return to 2007, Assange present, imperious, getting to 30 minutes in the hall, the few listening, the technicians working, his talking over them? The audience admiring him?

7. The explanations of his background, his family and his mother, not meeting his birth father till later, their presence in the cult, the effect on him, his white hair and the children having to death dye their hair white, a feeling of oppression, escape? On the run? His relationships, having a child? His hacking in Melbourne, his associates, being in the courts? The film filling in this background?

8. Daniel, a serious man, his beliefs, a realist, his providing funds? His loyalty to Assange, his relationship with hunger? Assange and his will and his whims?

9. Daniel and his friendship with the hacker, the hackers interest, skills? Assigned Assange not interested in him, his working with Daniel, blocking hacking, his worries?

10. Assange and his whims of picking associates, the woman, who work, attending on him? The young man? Hiring and firing?

11. Assange and his personality, the mad prophet, the manipulative acyl, his comments about autism and the effect on his obsessions, skills, lack of people skills, wanting the truth? His bluntness? Is going to Daniel’s family and walking out on them? Pleasant when he needed to be, the scenes of him dancing and the clubs, the background of the accusations against him about Sweden? His wanting total command, giving orders?

12. The information, on the site? The Kenya stories, corruption, the assassinations, his visits, been personally affected?

13. Bradley Manning, the footage of the attack in Iraq, the helicopter pilots and their shooting the Reuters journalist, the innocent father helping? People’s reaction to this footage?

14. The Afghanistan documents, thousands of them, the inability to sift through them all? Daniel and his perspective? Assange in his perspective? The contact with the journalists, with debt Speigel, with the New York Times, with the Guardian?

15. The personalities at the Guardian, the meetings with Assange, with Daniel, the speeches in Iceland, the acclaim for the revelations about the banks Western Mark? Daniel and his getting the phone message, coming immediately?

16. The negotiations at the Guardian, four – Beagle, for the New York Times, the editor of the Guardian, considerations, nuances, the naming of names? The dangers? Cautions?

17. The American State Department, the officials, Sarah Shaw and her concern, the contact with the agent from Libya, getting out of Libya with his family? Boswell and his attitude? Sam Coulson and his warnings? The role of the CIA? Sarah Shaw losing her job?

18. The building to the crisis, the meetings at the Guardian, the effect on each personality?

19. Assange and his falling out with Daniel, dismissing him? Daniel and his fears, with the hacker, the decision to close down the site? The effect on Assange as he was giving his speech? His anger?

20. Assange, the warning that there would be a whispering campaign against him, the Swedish accusations, is finally going to the Ecuadorian embassy? His remaining there?

21. The final interview with Assange, his comments, even about the attitude of the film? The story continuing?

CARRIE

Paris, 2013, 100 minutes, Colour.
Chloe Grace Moretz, Julienne Moore, Gabriella Wilde, Judy Greer, Portia Doubleday,
Directed by Kimberley Pearce.

Carrie was a surprise hit film of 1976, both at the box office and critically, with Oscar nominations. It made a star out of Sissy Spacek and marked Piper Laurie’s later career as successfully dramatic. It was the first cinema adaptation of the Stephen King story.

As with so many re-makes, fans of the original ask why a re-make is necessary. Perhaps it is not necessary, but it can offer an interesting opportunity for a re-interpretation. This film is an arresting re-working of the story and characters, but, on the whole, the fans were critical, especially of Chloe Grace Moretz considered too pretty to portray Carrie.

The film has been directed by Kimberley Peirce, who was successful in directing Boys Don’t Cry. She brings a strong female perspective to this film and a strong empathy towards Carrie and an understanding of her mother. To that extent, it is a re-interpretation, placing a great emphasis on bullying at school, as well as religious physical and psychological abuse at home. The girls at school are quite callous in their torment of Carrie, at sport, in the school corridors, in the shower block after she experiences her first period and does not understand it and experiences bewilderment and pain, and the girls call out mocking her, throwing tampons at her, filming her plight and then posting it on Facebook.

Chloe Grace Moretz is a very good actress and gives an interesting interpretation of Carrie. And Julianne Moore is very strong as her mother. Judy Greer has a good role as the sympathetic teacher.

Audiences familiar with Stephen King’s story will follow the prom night development, Carrie reluctant, Sue feeling guilty about her role in the torment of Carrie, urging her boyfriend Tom to take Carrie to the prom, his initial reluctance, his charm, the limo, his gentlemanly behaviour towards Carrie at the prom, urging her to dance. It seems ironic that he should die in the fiasco of the prom.

Gabriella Wilde is the more sympathetic Sue. Portia Doubleday is calculating malice as Carrie’s tormentor.

Of course, those familiar with the story are waiting for the prom and the scene with the bucket of pig’s blood. There is a build up as we see the malicious girl killing the pig and the collection of the blood, her watching from above the proscenium to wait for the moment to pour the blood on Carrie. Once carry is drenched, she becomes an icon of vengeance with her telekinetic powers, creating mayhem in the hall, death and destruction, as she moves her arms and hands as if she were conducting an orchestra.

Finally, Carrie confronts her mother, who has often put her daughter in a cupboard filled with religious pictures and crucifixes, where, at one stage, Carrie sees blood flowing on a crucifix. As her powers are exercised on her mother, she transfixes her to the cupboard door like a crucifixion.

There is some slight respite at the end as explanations are given in a courtroom scene. Then Sue goes to the cemetery, to Carrie’s grave. Because this is a remake, it would have been appropriate to repeat the great shock sequence, so often imitated since, at the end of the original. The same point is made here, but in an ever-so-slight way, which is disappointing. But the film is an interesting re-make.

1. The classic status of the 1976 original, the strong cast, direction by Brian De Palma? The Stephen King story?

2. The necessity of a remake? The re-framing and reinterpreting of the original? The female perspective, the female experiences? Physical, sexual, psychological, religious? The new cast?
3. The 21st century adaptation, representing young people and their mores, the status of religion, of technology, of bullying?

4. The portrait of Carrie’s mother, the initial scream over the credits, on her bed, thinking she had cancer, ready to die, her attitude towards God, the sudden birth of the baby, the scissors, the threat, keeping the baby, loving the baby? A strong sense of religion, equating sin with sexuality, handing this on to Carrie? Her control, Puritan outlook, protecting her daughter? Home-schooling, picking her up from class, her sewing the dresses, the asceticism in pricking her leg, her desperation, the end, talking about Carrie’s father, her own sexual behaviour, and liking it, the sin, putting Carrie in the cupboard, Carrie putting her in the cupboard, the blood as she tried to get out, Carrie trying to kill her, the image of the crucified on the door, with knives and scissors, Carrie letting her down, the end and her death?

5. Carrie, her age, timid, the experience of home-schooling, lack of skills in relating to others, at school, the swimming pool and her awkwardness, the volleyball and her hitting the girl, the relief of the shower, the sudden experience of the period, her fear, the hurt, the girls mocking her, her desperation, their throwing tampons at her, the teacher, the intervention, the girl filming it and posting it on Facebook? The teacher hitting Carrie, helping her, taking her to the principal for discussion?

6. Sue and Tom, their sexual relationship, the pregnancy, Sue and her repenting? Her dissociating herself from the other girls and their mockery? Agreeing with the teacher to continue running and not be suspended? Her apology to Carrie? With Chris? The idea for Tom to take Carrie to the prom, her going and standing outside, feeling the danger, shut out, trying to help, carries attitude and saving her?

7. Chris, her malice, bullying, at the pool, with the volleyball, filming the episode, throwing the tampons, encouraging the others, posting the scene, technology and bullying? Confronting the teacher, refusing to comply, her being suspended? Going to Billy, with the other girls, trying to persuade Sue and failing? The plan, the pigs, her choice, killing the pig, collecting the blood? The malice at the prom, with the pig’s blood, a moment’s hesitation, pouring it, the escape, Carrie and the pursuit, the car, Billy being killed, Carrie lifting the car, Chris’s face in the glass, her death?

8. The other girls, their mockery, the showers, in the corridors, laughing at the prom, the experience of deaths, destruction and mayhem?

9. The prom, Carrie’s mother, not wanting her to go, Carrie and the shop, buying the material, making the dress, her mother’s thinking the dress immodest, the hesitation with Tom, agreeing, the flower, Tom’s arrival, the limousine, his charm, his friends, the table, talking, Tom and his coaxing Carrie to dance, the vote for king and queen?

10. The vote, read, the announcement, going to the stage, crowned?

11. The blood, over Carrie, Tom spattered, his death?

12. Carrie as an icon of vengeance, her hands and orchestrating the destruction, the visuals, the pursuit of the car of Billy and Chris?

13. Her return home, her mother, the bath, the confrontation, the crucifixion, letting her mother down, her death? Carrie dying?

14. The court scene, Sue and her explanations? Going to the cemetery, the crack in the gravestone? (And the contrast with the shock of the hand in the
original?)

SKYFALL

UK, 2012,
Daniel Craig, Judi Dench, Javier Bardem, Naomie Harris, Ralph Fiennes, Rory Kinnear.
Directed by Sam Mendes.

It looks as though this is a James Bond film that you will have to see to make up your own mind. The critics have been generally very favourable. The box-office has been very good. But, the bloggers on the net have been devastating in their critiques and condemnations.

This review will be favourable.

While admittedly there are some plot holes and some improbabilities (and should you want details, the IMDb has more than 590 entries and counting, some growling about in minute detail and numbered lists, the flaws), this celebration of James Bond’s fifty years is quite entertaining. It is also a consolidation of Daniel Craig’s taking on the role. He is a rather unsmiling actor and has been tough and rugged in his previous two films. Here he is still rugged but has a little more debonair charm than before and does a lot of his confronting of villains wearing suit and tie. This is true of the opening sequence, chases in Turker and over the roofs (as in The International and Taken 2), car chases, pursuit on the top of a train (with the help of a bulldozer) and a sequence where he is shot and plunges into a river. And that’s just the beginning.

Fans have complained that the film is boring. Depends on what you want. If it’s non-stop bursts of action and guns, then it will be boring. However, there is much more to the plot. The list of agents has been hijacked and M and Gareth Mallory (Judi Dench and Ralph Fiennes) are being pressurised by expert computer hacking and the blowing up of MI6 buildings. It’s about time for Bond to return – and he does.

In tracking down the villain, there is an assassination in Imax-like panoramas of Shanghai. There is a femme fatale (Berenice rather good in what turns out to be a small role) and, ultimately, a meeting with the arch-villain. His entry is most striking. A long shot as he walks towards a bound Bound, arriving in close-up as he explains himself. It is Javier Bardem as Silva. Barden won an Oscar for his oddly-coiffed assassin in No Country for Old Men. This time he is much quieter, somewhat camp in manner and conversation, blonde hair, a master narcissistic psychopath – whose motives are revealed and make sense in the contxt of MI6.

But, most of the final action is in England and, then, in Scotland. Silva, after being captured by Bond, is targeting both Bond and M and engineers an escape which sets him loose in London where he wreaks disaster (the Tube crash of a Wimbledon-bound District Line train) and death (especially at a parliamentary enquiry).

Bond decides that a showdown is needed and opts for the highlands (where Albert Finney turns up for an entertaining cameo).

While there are explosions and shootouts, the level of sex and violence is played down compared with previous films.

Women are to the fore in this outing. Naomie Harris has plenty of action in Turkey, action and glamour in Shanghai before she settles down as Miss Moneypenny. And, this is very much Judi Dench’s film, appearing right throughout the film and essential to plot development.

The film is long and there may be too much character development and talk for the action-only addicts, but Sam Mendes is a stylish director, the performances are fine, there is wit in the dialogue and some sentiment, with even Craig-Bond? shedding a tear at one stage.

And the late explanation of the title helps bring it all together nicely.

1. James Bond after 50 years? The tradition of the Bond films? Adaptations through the decades? the different actors as James Bond and their different styles? The adaptation of Ian Fleming stories, the later creation of new stories? The tradition of the credits sequences and visuals? The theme songs? 23 films?


2. This film as lavish, celebrating the golden jubilee, Daniel Craig, Judi Dench, Javier Bardem and the cast? The range of locations?

3. The title, James Bond’s ancestral home and the culmination of the film there? Its memories for Bond, his memories of his family, their deaths, growing up? The theme song and its performance, mood? The visuals of the credits?

4. Daniel Craig’s Bond, rugged, physical, his accent, moving into stylish clothes, his manner? A tough 21st-century Bond?

5. Judi Dench as M, in control, ruthless, the information about the initial fight in Istanbul, the decision about shooting Bond, the risk? Her creating enemies? Silva and his animosity, his past career and his attitudes towards M? The control of Bond, relying on him, sending him to Asia? The bombing of MI 6? Mallory calling her to account? The parliamentary hearing? Her confronting Silva? Working work with her assistant, Tanner? Going to Scotland with Bond, in the house, getting ready for the attack, the climax, her being wounded, her death?

6. Headquarters, Mallory, his interview with Bond and encouraging him? Giving advice? His later becoming M? The Parliamentary enquiry, the minister and her harsh attitudes? The young Q, meeting at the gallery, not using old devices, the new, the gun and its hand-mould, the pen and location? 21st-century weapons?

7. The opening in Istanbul, the fight on the roof, the chase, Patrice as a killer, the killing of the agents, Bond finding them dead, collaborating with Eve, communicating with him and with M? The killer, on the train roof, the tunnels, lining up the shot, Miss Moneypenny firing, Bond plunging into the river? Seeking the USB and the information about the agents?

8. Honouring Bond, the funeral, the tributes?

9. His disappearance, his life, drinking, fighting, hearing of the explosions, his decision to return to London? Meeting M, meeting Mallory, the discussions with Q?

10. His going back on active service, going to Shanghai, the elaborate buildings, Patrice, getting the information, meeting Severine in the club, the death of Patrice? Going to the compound on the island?

11. Silva, the long take, his entry and speech, finally confronting Bond, Silva and his appearance, his head, clothes, taunts? Camp manner? Sexual implications? His wanting Bond to kill Severine, his brutality and killing her? His attitude towards M, taunting about Mummy, wanting to kill her? The helicopters, Bond’s device for location, capturing Silva?

12. Silva in the glass, Bond’s confrontation, M going to meet him, the explanations, his help outside his prison, his henchmen, the breakout, the explosion at the enquiry, going to the London Underground, the train, the derailment and the mayhem?

13. Bond and the decision to go to Scotland, taking M, driving, the house, meeting Kincade, memories of the past, Kincade and the guns, the priest’s hole, the preparation for the attack? The landing, the helicopters, the soldiers in the attack? Fights, the use of skills, tactics, explosions, deaths? The build-up to the confrontation between Silva and Bond, M dying, Silva dying?

14. The continuation of the series, Mallory becoming M, the visit with Bond, Miss Moneypenny, a sequel?

MACBETH

UK, 2013, 145 minutes, Colour.
Kenneth Branagh, Alex Kingston, Ray Fearon, John Shrapnel.
Directed by Kenneth Branagh,

This version of Macbeth belongs to the National Theatre Live series, plays being staged in theatres in England and photographed, film and television-like, for transmission to cinemas around the world. It gives an extra dimension to the play, by its editing, different angles, longshots and close-ups…, An opportunity to see the cast with great focus.

Venue for this version is a church in Manchester, auditions and rehearsals having taken place also in a church in London. This gives something of a sense of the sacred as well as a sense of evil in the brutality of the battles, in Macbeth’s ambition, in his being urged on by his wife, in the killing of Malcolm, in the destruction of Banquo, in the murder of Lady Macduff and her son, in the tyranny of Macbeth. And, of course, it is more profound in the sleepwalking scene for Lady Macbeth as well as for Macbeth’s final soliloquy.

This version is in no way modernised, but is set in its time, with costumes of the time as well as weapons. (One of the difficulties in the close-up of watching the performance is that, especially at the end, with Macbeth and Macduff battling, the choreography of the fight with swords is all too obvious as is the deliberate movement of the actors so that the fight seems staged rather than real.)

The film opens well with the three witches, standing in niches high on the wall of the church. They are made up in black, young but sinister. What follows immediately is a long staging of battle sequences so that Macbeth will be proclaimed Thane of Cawdor. King Duncan appears as do his sons, Malcolm seeming rather slight character, very young and inexperienced – although he gains in great strength and stature in the final battles and his becoming King.

Sometimes the action moves very swiftly, the killing of Duncan not long after the battles. It is here that we begin to appreciate the strong presence of Kenneth Branagh as Macbeth. Alex Kingston is quite strong as Lady Macbeth, though sometimes she is asked to perform in what seems a mechanical physical manner, moving around unnecessarily in her anxiety, and then quite stylised in the sleepwalking sequence and her arm motion. Macbeth, believing the prophecy of the witches, becomes more enmeshed in his ambition, to the killing of Banquo, to his deceiving Macduff.

The comedy of the Porter’s scene and the knocking at the door is handled quite humorously, not ignoring the bawdy implications of some of the porter’s words and actions.

For some time, Macbeth is absent from the stage, while Malcolm and Donalbain flee and are under suspicion of killing their father, with a confrontation between Macbeth and Banquo, with the visit of Macduff and the other soldiers. Then there is the scene with Lady Macduff and her son, and the shocking brutality of their deaths. When the news is given to Macduff, Ray Fearon gives quite an extraordinary display of grief and vocal lament. It is here that we can see that he will be the ultimate confronter of Macbeth.

As the play moves to an end, we have the sleepwalking scene with Lady Macbeth washing her hands trying to get rid of the damned spot. Then we have the final soliloquy, with Branagh’s interpretation of the familiar words, a tear coming from his eye, spittle falling from his lips, a choking uttering of ‘sound and fury’, followed by a very long pause after ‘signifying’ – and the strenuously quiet uttering of ‘nothing’.

The film makes much of Birnum Woods coming to Dunsinane, building up to the final fight, finally a long time given to the acclamation of Malcolm, his becoming King, and restoring order to a tragically disordered world.

After his performances as Henry V, Hamlet, and his other Shakespearean appearances as, for instance, Iago in Oliver Parker’s of Othello, and in the Branagh-directed films, Loves Labours Lost and As You Like It, it is essential to see his interpretation of Macbeth.

There are some interesting details in the presentation of the play in the church, candles lit, Lady Macbeth before the candles during the witches sequence, and a layer of mud along the aisle of the church especially for the initial battles, but remaining throughout the film, giving it an earthy feel.

THE WATERDANCE

US, 1992, 106 minutes, Colour.
Eric Stoltz, Helen Hunt, Wesley Snipes, William Forsythe, Grace Zabriskie, Elizabeth Pena.
Directed by Neal Jimenez and Michael Stirnberg.

Writer-director, Neal Jimenez became a paraplegic in a climbing accident. Affecting drama is based on his experience of hospitalization and reshaping his life. The bitterness, the neediness, the physical and mental strength required for coping, the camaraderie amongst patients how well portrayed. Waterdance avoids sentimentality with some raucous sequences and an earthy realism about the characters and their behaviour.

Eric Stoltz makes the central character credible. Helen Hunt is his girlfriend, with whom the audience identifies in trying to learn how to handle situations, and William Forsythe and Wesley Snipes portray paraplegics who are victims of life as well as of their physical disabilities. The Jimenez has channeled his experience in to a moving/realistic film. Sympathetic and tough portrait of paraplegics.

1. A moving film? For empathizing with the disabled? Complexities of what happened to them by accident and their having to cope?

2. An autobiographical film, the experience of the writer-director?

3. The title, dancing and love for water, joel’s dream, not going beneath the water?

4. The focus on physical disabilities, the results of accidents, crime victims, the effect, quadriplegia, paraplegia, Damage to spying, brain? The audience experiencing the disabilities with the cast?

5. The mental repercussions, having to cope, depression, anger, frustration, loss of quality of life, livelihood, difficulties in mobility? The response of people, through their regard, PT, reaching out to help?

6. The institution, the location for the action, its appearance, inside and outside, the focus on the ward, corridors? The staff within this context, uniforms, care, medical, putting the patients at ease? Les and his concern? Rose of? The doctors and their examinations?

7. Joel was the focus, the initial scenes with his wounded face, lying prostrate, meeting the mirror? His being confined? The pace of his gradual healing, improvement? His getting the dark glasses, separating himself from the others? Attempted disdain? His writing career, assumptions that he was superior? His relationship with Anna? Working with her with his books? Her being married? The affair? Her coming to visit, his mixed attitudes towards her, rude behavior, and loving? The sexual encounters, being court? The importance of facing sexual questions, potency in the pit and sea? Her reading to him? The outings? The buildup of the relationship, her telling him that she had told her husband, separation? His advising her to stay with her husband? Her dismay? The right decision? Joel’s motivations, his not wanting her to have to look after him all his life?

8. Joel, wit each of the patients? The bond with ray, the discussions, issues, as being jovial? Boss and his antagonism, the biker background, his mother, is antagonism? Vern and his continually calling for Rosa? Joel seeing his wife, helping him with the television, his being a constant presence? The Hispanic man, his family, the birth of the child and celebrations? The young Korean man, his being wounded by the robber? His family?

9. Ray, as a character, his talk, his boasting of being a ladies’ man, his wife, daughter, the visit and the talk about divorce, unwillingness? His leaving and living in an institution? His drinking? The bet with the boss about Annabel lee? Bosses visit to the home, denial about Annabel lee? His talking about suicide, going under a bus, the phone call, his drinking, the group are going out to find him? The rescue? His not remembering? A portrait of a man and his trying to deal with disability?

10. The loss, the biking background, the accident, visiting the site again, his mother’s visits, her liking the people in the ward, talking with him, correcting him? An anchorman, his racist and bursts, with the people who came in to do the square dancing? His bed with ray, the antagonism towards ray? Talk to Joel and his criticism of Hispanics? His going away, returning, the outing, going into see Ray, the bet?

11. The young Korean man, as family, is going on the outing, the excitement in the van, with the girls?

12. Vern, the forests, his brain damage, his wife visiting? Joel helping with the television?

13. Lawson the decision to go out, Joel driving, taking the view, some reckless moments, and raise house, going to the club, drinking, the strippers, a blend them, the money, seem less, borrowing? Annabel lee and her talking to the men, her memories of ray?

14. Hospital as the phrase in the life of the patients, their adapting to change, for the future? A film with some hope and relying on human kindness and values?

STILL MINE

Canada, 2012.
James Cromwell, Genevieve Bujold, Campbell Scott, Julie Stewart.
Directed by Michael Mc Gowan.

Still Mine is a film about aging and mental deterioration. It is a film which will resonate very strongly with older audiences and also with those in their forties fifties and sixties who are thinking about their parents and what the future will bring for them. However, this is a film of strength and hope.

It is based on a true story, set in the province of New Brunswick, Canada. The location photography brings the town and of the surrounding countryside to life.

Central to the film is the character of Craig Morrison, played with great strength and determination by James Cromwell, who, after his turn as Farmer Hoggart in Babe, has appeared in many strong roles, a fine screen presence. As his wife, Irene, Canadian actress Genevieve Bujold, who in the past played Anne of the Thousand Days, gives a wonderful, unglamorous performance, slowly losing her memory, trying to cope with this, supportive of her husband as he is of her. In the story, they have been married for 61 years and have seven children, the story of their marriage told with delicacy, with intimacy.

The Canadian economy is in decline. Craig has to sell his cattle. He grows strawberries but they are rejected because they are not brought to the depot in un-refrigerated trucks. Because the family house has been so big, he decides to build a new one for Irene and himself. It is here where the difficulties really start. He relies on his own ability, learned from his father, his knowledge of lumber and cutting down trees and making planks to build the house. Suddenly, he is forbidden to build. He doesn’t have a permit, then he doesn’t have plans, then his wood is not stamped with approval. There is a threat to have the place bulldozed and he eventually goes to court. The bureaucracy tells him that he is disobeying rules. He makes the distinction between rules and standards and that his work is above standard..

Craig he is helped by one of his sons and is constantly advised by one of his daughters, a mixture of both Craig and Irene. When Irene is hospitalized, there is greater concern.

The audience is certainly on Craig’s side, even though we know he is a strong and stubborn man and needs to make some kind of compromise. It is when a friend with whom he has been sparring for many years dies and he weeps, we realize that he has great tenderness and that he has shown it to his wife for all the years.

Some commentators have made the link between Still Mine and L’ Amour. The latter Oscar-winning film was intense, confined to the house, focusing on the couple and Alzheimers, with an intrusion by a zealous daughter. While it showed the great love and tenderness, and the stress on the husband, as Still Mine does, it does not have the scope of the down-to-earthness and hope that this Canadian film does. At the end, there is a credit to the Morrison family and indication that both Craig and Irene were still living at the time of the films initial release. He was 91.


1. A portrait of ageing? Based on a true story? The collaboration of the family?

2. The title, for Craig, for Irene? The spouse, the land, the house, life and dignity?

3. Canadian production, settings, New Brunswick, the farm, the land, the vistas, the roads, the buying and the water, the town, offices, the court? The musical score?

4. Comparisons with other films about age, ageing, I was a nurse?

5. The opening, Craig in court, bulldozing in the house, the law, the prospect of bulldozing? Initiating the flashback?

6. A story told in flashback? Craig and Irene and their story? 61 years of marriage, meeting, the dance, a tipsy, Craig sick on irene’s sister? The bond between the two, the marriage, memories of the honeymoon, love, intimacy? Seven children? Craig and his work, instructed by his father, his respect for his father? Helping Chester in 1973? Sparring with Chester? Age, into the eighties? A good man, tough and stubborn?

7. Irene and her age, love for her husband, not looking glamorous? Beginning to forget, burning things on the star, asking questions, becoming more braid, repetitions, Craig and his upset reactions? Yet apologizing and caring? Even cooking?

8. Driving, the cattle, having to get rid of them, buying the milk from Ruthie, the strawberries, the Peking, taking them to the agent, their being rejected the course not brought in a frozen container? Giving the strawberries away on people’s porches? The farm going down? The decision to build the house?, Irene’s reaction, consent, not wanting to move until necessary? John, helping with the excavation? Craig and his going into the forest, cutting down the tree, trading it, cutting it in his workshop, his knowledge of lumber? The tools and the workshop? His abilities?

9. The issues of bureaucracy, the notice, the need for a permit, his going to the office, his tangles with the official, the official and his lack of practical experience? The need for a stamp on the board, the approval of the joists and the joins? The need for plans? His grandson, the engineer, the willing to do the plans, the details? Craig and the little boy, discussions about A age, his coming to help with the measuring? Cravatt and his speech about his father, his abilities? The issue of rules and the law? The various visits, prospective prosecution? Craig being servant? His visits to his lawyer, the discussions, the advice, the lawyer admitting his mistakes, granting in a grant of land?

10. Irene, her deterioration, with these concern, discussions with her father, with john? Yet the bond, the memories, cont sexual intimacy, her needs, support, the prospect of the house, her falling down the stairs, in hospital, later wandering to the beach, in the car, the cold, Craig and draining her inside, her tripping over the shoe, hospital, surgery, rehabilitation? The funeral sequences, her presence, comforting Maggie, in the wheelchair? Her strong character?

11. Ruthie, strong character, with her father, turn and write her father, worried about her mother, her own life and work?

12. John, his work, friendship with his father, talk, support, the experience of ange?

13. The phone call, the journalist, the interviews, the fact that Chester had urged him to ring, the articles in the paper?

14. Just as death, Craig weeping in the church?

15. The court sequence, Craig speech about baseball, but the difference between rules and standards? His being prepared to go to jail? His speech about his wife?

16. Going to the house, the newspaper article, the complete house?

17. The final information about Craig and Irene, age, going into the house?

18. A film about experience and wisdom, age and deterioration, the emotional response of the audience as well as of understanding of the problems of age?

LES AMANTS

France, 1958, 90 minutes, Black and white.
Jeanne Moreau, Jean- Marc Bory, Alain Cuny, Jose de Villalonga.
Directed by Louis Malle.

Les Amants is a second feature film by Louis Malle, after directing some documentaries. He was to have a successful career for 30 years. In the 1960s he made a variety of films, including Viva Maria, working again with Jeanne Moreau. In the 1970s he made Lacombe Lucien about occupied France. Working in America he made such films as Pretty Baby, Atlantic City, Alamo Bay. He also made the autobiographical film Au Revoir Mes Enfants, Farewell, my Children. His last films were the British Damage and Vanya on 42nd street.
The Lovers caused controversy in its time, in America being sued for obscenity. However, after long court proceedings the film was pronounced as not being pornographic.
In itself, it has a simple plot: a bored housewife, a busy and detached husband, a young daughter, the wife having an affair with a celebrity polo player, a chance encounter with a young man, infatuation, a sensual and passionate night spent with him, a decision to leave home and family.
More direct than many of the films of the past, it was part of the new wave, Nouvelle Vague, then beginning, from significant French directors like Truffaut, Chabrol, Godard.

1. An early film of Louis Malle? The French new wave? A film of the late 1950s? The work of a man in his mid-twenties?

2. The visual style, black and white photography, locations, the use of Brahms’ music?

3. The directness of the title, the basic plot, the perspectives in the treatment, both real and lyric, the final passionate part of the films? The controversies of the 1950s?

4. The use of the voiceover, of Jeanne?

5. Jeanne’s life, the home, her marriage to Henri, their daughter, Catherine? Her friend in Paris, her relationship with Raoul, his being the star polo player? A sedate life, her wanting more, the affair, life in Paris?

6. Henry, the presence of Alain Cuny, his age, running of the paper, busy, the formality of the relationship, his detachment? The scenes at home?

7. Raoul, his reputation, his skill at polo, the nature of his affair with Jeanne?

8. Jeanne Moreau, in her early career, her portrayal of Jeanne, the detail? At home, the relationship with Henri, formal? Her visits to Paris? The scenes with Raoul? Her visit to her friend, confidante? The car, driving, the breakdown, the encounter with Bernard, the ride, their laughing together, about the bear? Her bringing him home? The night, the passionate and sensual love scene, suggestions rather than explicit? The length of the scene? The bed, the bath, the morning and night, her decision to leave? Driving into the sunrise?

9. Bernard, in himself, relationships, pretensions, the night, his relationship with Jeanne, the decision to leave?

10. Jeanne leaving, the decision to leave her daughter, to leave Henri? How realistic a future? A permanent relationship with Bernard or not? Her discovery of love, despite uncertainty?

THE GREAT McGINTY

US, 1940, 83 minutes, Black and white.
Brian Donlevy, Akim Tamiroff, Muriel Angelus, Louis Jean Heydt, Arthur Hoyt, William Demarest.
Directed by Preston Sturges.

The Great Mc Ginty was the first film directed by eminent comic screenwriter Preston Sturges. He was to go on to make films like Sullivan's Travels, Hail the Conquering Hero, The Miracle of Morgan's Creek during the '40s. Sardonic but optimistic films about the American way of life.

This film has small budget style from Paramount In the early '40s, has Brian Donlevy as a star (very credible) and matches him with Akim Tamiroff. Nevertheless, despite the small budget, the film is an excellent characterisation, satire on American democracy and its abuses.

1. Good comedy, optimism through satire?

2. The writing of Preston Sturges, his moving into direction, his comic satiric
classics of the '40s?

3. Paramount production values, black and white photography, sets, the stars?

4. The framework: the opening comment about the man who made mistakes all his life and did one good deed contrasted with the man who did everything right and did one small thing wrong. Their destinies? The flashback
structure of tie film - and the humorously ironic ending?

5. The portrait of Thompson, his embezzlement, his presence in the sleazy club, the girl, his desperation, listening to McGinty's story?

6. McGinty? telling his story, deadpan style of delivery? His property, buying the boats? buying 37, getting the money, the agent and the interaction with him, going to the Boss who appreciated his success? His getting the job, his standover tactics for getting protection money, the mixture of violence and charm, raising $1100 and the Boss giving it to him? His independent attitude, cheeky? Becoming an alderman, his work? In the background, Katherine as secretary and her economic theories? The Boss proposing that he run for Mayor, agreeing? The interactions with the Boss? The money deals? Katherine and the question of marriage, her proposal in an objective manner? A deal and arrangement? The wedding ceremony, the comic style, his going his way and she going hers? Looking over the house? Discovering the kids? His mellowing with Katherine, with the kids? Standing up for her? Falling in love?. The discussion about graft and the opportunities for helping the poor in the cities? His memories of his youth, working in the factory, dignity? His explanations about the system? The proposal that he run for governor, the parade, the election campaign? His election, his finally taking a stance against the boss about dams and buildings? The arrest, in prison, his arrangements for Katherine and the children, their education? His escape? The finale? Portrait of a tough guy with a human heart?

7. Katherine, secretary, her philosophy of economy, the marriage proposal, the arrangement, her friendship with George, McGinty? and his working well with the kids, reading them stories? The house, the end and her trying to help?

8. The Boss, behind the scenes, buying votes for the mayor, always present, the protection racket, relationship with McGinty?, giving him the money, the political victories? The final confrontation? Both in jail?

9. William Demarest as the helper, buying the votes, his role in the election campaign, highlighting the populist philosophy in comparison with the campaigner telling the people the truth? His place at the end?

10. The picture of elections, vote-catchers and buyers, helpers? Businessmen and their deals? The picture with 75,000 people in the stadium - and graft?

11. The picture of American cities, money, power, people?

12. The end and its ironic humour?

13. The picture of a good man, opportunity, lacking opportunity, caught in systems? Doing a good deed?