THE GIRL FROM JONES BEACH

US, 1949, 78 minutes, Black and white.
Ronald Reagan, Virginia Mayo, Eddie Bracken, Dona Drake, Henry Travers, Lois Wilson, Florence Bates, Jerome Cowan, Helen Westcott, Paul Harvey, Lloyd Corrigan.
Directed by Peter Godfrey.

The Girl from Jones Beach is a slight comedy of 1949 – in the days of glamour girls.

Ronald Reagan is an artist who has constructed an ideal model from twelve different models – each thinking that they were the Randolph Girl, his creation. A businessman wants her on a TV show and Eddie Bracken, as a rather dopey agent, is urged by his girlfriend, Dona Drake, to be the agent for her. He discovers that there are twelve girls each contributing a part to the ideal Randolph Girl. As a running joke, when he pretends to attempt suicide – and while doing so at Jones Beach sees Virginia Mayo on the beach and decides she is the ideal Randolph Girl. However, each times she comes out of the dressing rooms, he does not recognise her.

While this plot is going on, Ronald Reagan as Bob Randolph wants to ingratiate himself into Virginia Mayo’s company so as to make a contract with her. However, she is a rather proper teacher, interested in the beauty of the mind, often quoting Shakespeare and other poets (and the date of their writing).

Reagan pretends to be Czech, goes to her night class for those wanting to be American citizens. Ultimately his cover is broken, Virginia Mayo changes her mind, she is sacked from her job at the school after being photographed in the swimming costume. It all goes to court – with Henry Travers presiding and Florence Bates as the principal who, it is revealed, was rather daring in her day.

It all ends happily ever after. It was directed by Peter Godfrey, a British actor who directed many B films at Warner Bros including The Two Mrs Carrolls, Cry Wolf, Christmas in Connecticut.

1. A pleasant Warner Bros comedy of 1949? Screwball touches? The battle of the sexes? The touch of old-fashioned sexism and glamour girls?

2. The New York settings, Jones Beach, the sea? Homes, schools, studios? Nightclub? The musical score?

3. The focus on Chuck Donovan, the inept agent, Eddie Bracken and his comic touches, his love for Connie? Her trying to get him a job? Her work as a cigarette girl? The executives and their wanting the Randolph Girl? Chuck and his notes, attempting suicide – in the subway, at Jones Beach? Connie finally calling his bluff by putting pills in champagne – and giving him another glass where he feels that he is actually dying? His dealings with Bob Randolph, his secretary? Having to deal with the twelve Randolph Girls? His ultimate success?

4. Bob Randolph, the fame of the Randolph Girl, the revelation that she was made up of twelve different models? Each model thinking she was the Randolph Girl? Some sittings? His secretary? The proposal by Chuck, Bob’s need for money? His meeting Ruth, deciding to go into the night class? His pretending to be Czech, the accent all over the place? His behaviour with Ruth, her response to him? At the nightclub, the outings, her falling in love? His being exposed? Her reaction? The issue with the bathing suit? Her being photographed?

5. Ruth, her work as a teacher, at home, her younger brother and his comments? Her mother previously being in the Follies, less conservative than her daughter? The mind? Quoting poetry? At the beach? The night class, the encounter with Bob, her puzzle, responding to him, changing dress, going out, walk along the beach? The expose?

6. Her decision, her being sacked by Miss Shoemaker? The court case, the presiding judge? The film of the history of the bathing suit? The images of Miss Shoemaker, the judge and his response, the date with her? The lawyer? Ruth being vindicated?

7. The happy ending – and an example of light comedy from the late 1940s?

TOTAL RECALL

US, 2012, 118 minutes, Colour.
Colin Farrell, Kate Beckinsale, Jessica Biel, Bryan Cranston, Bokeem Woodbine, Bill Nighy, John Cho.
Directed by Len Wiseman.

A remake of the 1990 science-fiction film with Arnold Schwarzenegger and Sharon Stone, directed by Paul Verhoeven. Time has enhanced the memory of the original and, with the huge outburst against this new version, it has acquired pedestal-classic status. This raises a perennial question: should movies be remade? More often than not, they don’t measure up to the original (or memories of the experience of the original which may not have been seen for some time). But, sometimes they do.

This review is happy to go out on a critical limb and praise Total Recall, 2012. In 1990 , the about-to-be governor of California was basically a bodybuilt action star with a heavy accent and delivery. Sharon Stone was just another actress – Basic Instinct came after this. Maybe, audiences read back their later iconic status into the film. It was directed by Dutchman Paul Verhoeven who had made Robocop and was to direct Basic Instinct.

The point. Colin Farrell is an actor, handsome but ordinary-looking. This means that this version is meant to offer a hero who is bewildered, manipulated, tormented by nightmares, laboring in a humdrum factory job, seeking his true identity and prepared to go to the company, Rekall, to be injected with new memories. Audiences can identify with Farrell. His wife is played by Kate Beckinsale who turns into a relentless pursuer of her husband, a fighter bent on vengeance. And, whatever her limitations, Beckinsale can act more persuasivley than Sharon Stone could in 1990. Perhaps modern audiences compare them as unfavourably ordinary compared with the larger than life protagonists of the original.

There is Jessica Biel as the mysterious rebel from The Colony. This time, there are two habitable parts of earth after chemical warfare in the 21st century, the United Federation of Britain and The Colony (as the map shows it: Australia) rather than Mars in the original. Bryan Cranston is the ruler of the Federation with malign intent on the Colony. Bill Nighy appears briefly (with an American accent) as Matthias, leader of the Revolution.

One of the most striking features of this Total Recall, and one reason for seeing the film, is the production design. The futuristic sets, intricate with great detail and huge in scope, are outstanding. The dark colony, very much like a crowded Chinese waterfront, reminds us of the design of Blade Runner. The Federation is much more London-like. But, it means that whatever is happening in the action, there is always something to look at, amazing sets.

We Can Remember it for you Wholesale is the Philip K. Dick short story on which the film is based. It ties in with the identity themes and control from his Blade Runner and Paycheck.

Maybe Paul Verhoeven and the original script had more tongue-in-cheek than this version which plays everything quite straightforwardly. As a straightforward version, with an effective lead who has to transform from meek worker to double agent and huge heroics, always good to look at, this Total Recall is gripping in its action and in its questions (though laziness in the screenplay often substitutes quick expletives for genuine emotions of fear and frustration).

1. The comparisons with the 1990 version? Plot? Cast? Director? Tone? Interpretation of the work by Philip K. Dick?

2. Philip K. Dick and his science fiction, the worlds that he created, futuristic? Issues of identity, humanity, androids? The implantation of memories, mind control? Revolution?

3. The importance of the sets, the colony and its darkness, the Chinese waterfront? Crowded? The British Federation, daylight, buildings, reminiscent of England? Familiar scenes? Transport, tunnels and mechanical devices and engineering? The home of the rebellion – dingy and abandoned? The musical score?

4. The tone of the film, straightforward – not with irony?

5. The initial information about the colony and the Federation? The transport between the two areas of the world? Space at a premium? The transport of the workers? Homes, jobs, mechanical and dreary, the creation of androids? Boredom, routine, the same seats in the transport? The attraction of Rekall? And possibilities?

6. Doug, the initial nightmare, the pursuit, Melina and her rescuing him, their being shot, her fall?

7. At home, the ordinariness, his relationship with Lori? Her job? Domestic scenes?

8. The sign for Rekall? Doug talking about the issue with his friend Harry? Harry warning against it? The worker and his support, urging Doug to go? His entering the building, the security, the staff? The possibilities of memories? His choosing to be a hero? The injection, the attack by the forces, the deaths, his being taken? His heroic reaction? Strength, fighting skills? The irony of his abilities but the revelation about his true self?

9. Cohaagen and his authority, control, the Orwellian supervision of people? The police, human, Robocops? The contrast with Mathias, the glimpse of him, his stand? The planning the invasion?

10. Lori, being an agent for Cohaagen? Her cover, the memories, their not being real, her being a plant? Her pursuit of Doug, her contempt for him, vengeance? Her relationship to Cohaagen and information and secrecy?

11. Melina, her reappearance, the mystery woman, the identifying with the dream? Proving herself to Doug?

12. Colin Farrell as ordinary, heroic, Rekall and his hopes, turning into a hero, becoming Hauser? Skills, the reality of Lori as being a plant, the police, the chases? Melina and his dreams? Her being his companion during the pursuit?

13. The visual effect of the chases, the editing and pace, the buildings, the tunnels, the lifts, eluding the pursuit, especially from Lori?

14. Going to Matthias, meeting him, his role, his character, his being killed? Melina as his deputy?

15. The truth about Hauser, his origins, his skills, his working with Cohaagen, infiltrating the rebels, his being turned, reinserted in the colony? His role to upset the status quo? The planting of memories?

16. His dilemmas, whether to trust Melina, Matthias? Cohaagen, Lori? His decision to trust?

17. The planning of the invasion, the confrontation, the troops, their destruction?

18. The people in the colony, watching the invasion, the media, television, the propaganda, their being saved?

19. Hauser, his final decisions, the confrontation with Lori, her death? Melina?

20. The Philip K. Dick intelligence content? The challenges about emotions, identity? The adrenalin-pumping action – a combination of action and intelligence?

BULLET

US, 1996, 92 minutes, Colour.
Mickey Rourke, Adrien Brody, John Enos III, Ted Levine, Tupac Shakur.
Directed by Julien Temple.

Bullet is a rather ugly film about New York gangsters, probably too strong for many audiences in the mid-90s and not widely screened. It was co-written by Mickey Rourke as a vehicle for himself. It was directed by British director, Julien Temple, whose blend of feature films and documentaries include over thirty years such films as The Great Rock ‘n Roll Scandal, Absolute Beginners, Earth Girls Are Easy, and documentaries The Filth and The Fury, Glastonbury.

The film is very strong on atmosphere, the streets of New York, a Jewish family and its traditions, the brutality of the various groups in New York, Jewish, African American, the clashes.

Mickey Rourke gives a typical performance, partly mumbling, partly alienating while wanting some sympathy. In an early role, Adrien Brody portrays his young brother who looks up to him – but is also a graffiti artist and wants something better in life. John Enos III is Mickey Rourke’s associate. At home, there is a shell-shocked brother, played effectively by Ted Levine, also an artist but with a death wish. In a role not too long before his murder, Tupac Shakur portrays the African American gangster head.

The film is only for those who are interested in the gangster genre, particularly the New York gangster genre.

1. The impact of the film? Grim? Ugly? Brutality? The world of gangsters?

2. The British director, his eye for New York and its environment? Colour photography? Editing and pace? Musical score?

3. The title, Butch Stein and his nickname? The reaction of the other gangsters in New York? His family?

4. Bullet, in jail, getting out? His taking the rap? The reaction of the prison guards? Being picked up by Ruby? His friendship with Lester? The confrontation with the junkies, taking them to the roof, their stripping and being humiliated? The later reactions?

5. Bullet, his relationship with Ruby, wanting to protect him? His relationship with Louis? Louis and his behaviour at home? The mother and father, their history in New York, bringing up the boys, their reactions to how they behave? The meals, life at home?

6. Tank, his henchmen? The clash with Bullet? Bullet trying to upstage Tank? Tank and his driving around, his henchmen?

7. Bullet and his deals, the drugs, the clubs, the women? The confrontations with Tank?

8. The character of Ruby, the violence, his being wounded? His devotion to Bullet? His artwork – and his future?

9. Louis, the background of the war, his imagination, his art, in his room, erratic behaviour? His loyalty to his brother? His final violent intervention?

10. Lester, the friendship with Bullet, his vanity? The violence?

11. The build-up to the various confrontations, New York gangster style? Murders? The overall impact of the film as a glimpse of the underbelly of New York City?

THE BOURNE LEGACY

US, 2012, 135 minutes, Colour.
Jeremy Renner, Rachel Weisz, Edward Norton, Stacy Keach, Scott Glenn, Zeljko Ivanek, Dennis Boutsikaris, Albert Finney, Oscar Isaac, David Strathairn, Shane Jacobson, Joan Allen.
Directed by Tony Gilroy.

Dramatically striking when spy chief, Edward Norton, declaims it, that the actions of his organization were ‘morally indefensible, absolutely necessary’, this phrase is a key quotation for appreciating what is happening in the Bourne films and so many other espionage stories. The final credits do remind us that the characters bear no resemblance to any person living or dead. But… While this all seems far-fetched, but…

Probably handy to do a bit of revision of the original trilogy if you have the time before seeing this one. It makes a number of references to previous operations with Jason Bourne, his alleged rogue behaviour, his minders (with glimpses of Albert Finney, Joan Allen, David Straithairn). There are several photos of Matt Damon’s Bourne.

However, this is the story of Aaron Cross, a specially trained operative and genetically modified agent. We see him on a survival exercise in Alaska, tough stuff. But, the chiefs are wanting to eliminate these agents and any trace of the doctors and labs for these modifications. But, like Jason Bourne, Aaron has quite a capacity for eluding death attempts (including some fascinating drone sequences), for taking on other identities and for going under the radar to escape detection. When there is a massacre in the lab, the surviving doctor, Rachel Weisz, goes on the run with Aaron whom she knew from chemical examinations.

The screenplay, by Tony Gilroy who wrote the previous Bourne films, requires a lot of attention to try to piece together what is going on, especially with the hard-bitten authorities. But it all comes together. And, for those who thought the film might have lacked action (except for Aaron surviving mountains, wolves and drones), the last half of the film has action a-plenty. The massacre in the lab is quite riveting. The attack on the doctor’s house is exciting. But, using the streets, buildings and roofs of Metro Manila, the long chase, on foot, by car, on motorbike should satisfy the fans. After all, that is what the movies, editing, musical score and pace, can do.

Jeremy Renner is quite effective as Aaron though he does not have the ironic smirks and tongue-in-cheek of Matt Damon. Rachel Weisz keeps up the pace as well. There are some interesting supporting roles, especially from Stacy Keach as the head of the CIA.

The final credit says that the film has been inspired by the books of Robert Ludlum. This one, with its worldwide conspiracies, rogue authorities and spies on the run, is certainly Ludlumesque.

1. The novels of Robert Ludlum? The film versions? The Bourne Trilogy? This film in the Ludlum tradition?

2. World conspiracies, espionage, American agencies? Control, minds and drugs, missions, weapons, secrecy?

3. The opening in Alaska? The vivid mountain photography? The contrast with Washington offices? Laboratories? American countryside and travelling through? The contrast with Manila, the use of Manila locations? The musical score?

4. The action sequences, stunt work, the effects?

5. The title, the focus on Jason Bourne, seeing photos of him, the reports in newspapers, his absence personally from the film? The clips of his previous associates?

6. The introduction to Aaron Cross, the demands on him in Alaska, timing and his mission, survival, the wolves, hardships on his body, arrival at the house, meeting the agent, their discussions, being wary, the mystery?

7. The CIA and the agencies, the range of personnel, the focus on Eric Byer, Retired Admiral Mark Turso? Their roles, secrecy? The personnel in the office, their various functions? Authority, secrecy and plans, their experiences, control, processing the elimination of the agents? Bourne as a rogue agent? Their decisions?

8. The plane in Alaska, Aaron and his shrewdness, getting out of the hut, the destruction of the hut, his survival instincts?

9. His moving to the south, the encounter with the doctor, his experience with her in terms of monitoring him? His finding her, arrival at her house? Her work, going to work, the personnel in the laboratory, the security, the secrecy, the encounter with the doctor and his going berserk? The massacre? Her hiding, survival? The vivid experience for the audience of this massacre?

10. Aaron’s history, his coming to the laboratory, Marta and her monitoring him? Her not knowing his name?

11. The role of the agents, the scenes of elimination of the agents? Aaron’s place on the list? The agents arriving at Marta’s house? Pleasant, the interrogation, their turning violent, Aaron and his arrival, the shootouts, the car, the escape?

12. Byer and his character, Turso? The role of surveillance?

13. Marta and Aaron, the information about the Philippines, getting to the airport, eluding the pursuers, cars and trains?

14. Getting on the plane, flying to the Philippines? The tickets, the cover, being on board?

15. The agencies and their resources for searching, tapes, surveillance? The huge screen, the personnel, working round the clock, studying the images, speculation? The discovery of Marta at the airport? The footage and the information? Arriving too late to stop the plane?

16. The contact with the Thai agent? The earlier deaths? His going to Manila?

17. Manila, the airport to the laboratory, the contacts, the security letting them in, the vast workplace, the tablets? The supervisor from Australia? The plausibility of this kind of factory? Aaron and Marta administering the remedy?

18. Going to the hotel, their experience in the laboratory, their almost being caught, using their skills to escape? Going to the hotel, Aaron and his state, gradually recovering? Marta going out to the shops?

19. The discovery by the Thai operative? The chase, the excitement, the role of the police, Aaron and his shrewdness? The use of the city landscapes, streets, markets, roofs? Vehicles? The bridge? The relentless pursuit of the Thai? The final confrontation and his defeat?

20. Aaron and Marta and their survival, the defeat of the plan of the authorities? The authorities and their reactions?

21. The authorities in the past, the glimpses, Bourne himself, the various agents who worked with him? The final arrival of Pam Landy, for the hearings, the investigations? The reactions to her presence?

22. Byer and his comments on the behaviour of the agencies being morally reprehensible but absolutely necessary?

YOUR SISTER’S SISTER

US, 2011, 90 minutes, Colour.
Emily Blunt, Rosemarie De Witt, Mark Duplass.
Directed by Lynn Shelton.

This review will try to be fair since it did not appeal to the reviewer at all.

It is certainly crafted with some care. The credit to Lynne Shelton is ‘written and directed by’. However, the three stars and actor, Mark Birbiglia, who makes the opening speech, are credited as ‘creative consultants’.

This means that she gave them situation information and they improvised. When Mike Leigh has done this with his casts, he hones what they have improvised into a finely wrought script. Here, the improvisation is filmed as such (edited later, of course). Which means that a lot of it (most of it) is like a home movie, actors interrupting or talking over each other – not helped by the sound engineering which makes it sound as if taped while it is happening. (Fortunately, the director does not use hand-held camera – which would be too much).

So, praise to the experimental approach, to the performances and the skills that went into the improvisation. But not to the sometimes over-pounding guitar score.

The trouble for this reviewer is that the whole thing is not particularly interesting. Mark Duplass plays Jack, the middle-aged slacker of a brother, Tom, whose memorial is being celebrated. Emily Blunt plays Iris, Tom’s girlfriend who is devoted to Jack. Rosemarie de Witt plays Iris’ sister who has just broken with her lesbian partner of seven years. Most of the action takes place at a holiday house on an island off Seattle (wonderful scenery). Lots of talk, lots of misunderstandings. The sisters have a strong bond. Jack finds himself in the middle of an emotional tangle which leads to questions about pregnancy, sperm donors and bringing up the children.

For the audience for whom this all clicks, satisfaction and praise. For those who are not drawn into the lives of this trio, who feel that they are trapped on the island and being forced to listen in to and observe what is going on, it will be a film difficult to sit through and be as interested in the characters as all that.

1. Critical acclaim? And the response of the average audience?

2. The Pacific coast settings? City? Island? The woods? The atmosphere of nature and the woods? The holiday house? The musical score?

3. The title? The reference to Iris? To Hannah? Jack’s perspective?

4. The improvised style of the film? The actors and their own dialogue? The sound engineering – making the film quite natural but yet artificial?

5. The focus on Tom, the year’s memorial? The group gathered together? Jack and the memories of his brother, his wanting to withdraw? His awkwardness? Iris, her relationship with Tom? Memories? Separation? Her fondness for Jack? Al and his speech in honour of Jack? The memories?

6. Iris and Jack? Their friendship? Jack being lugubrious? His being something of a slacker? Not able to keep a job? His personality, his size, manner of speaking? Iris, ordinary, friendly, self-confident?

7. The recommendation for Jack to go to the island? The holiday house? For him to get his bicycle? His going to the island, the ferry, the bike? Arriving at the house? Finding it occupied? Hannah’s reaction? Her letting him into the house after the recognition?

8. Hannah and Jack, their talking, getting to know each other? Drinking late in the night? Hannah and the break-up of the relationship? The further drinking, the sexual encounter, the repercussions afterwards? Their awkwardness, yet getting along well? The decision to keep the matter secret?

9. Iris’s sudden arrival? Bright and breezy? The reactions of Hannah and Jack? The talk, the memories, a happy trio? Yet the secret?

10. Hannah and her relationship with Iris, strong bond, discussions, mutual help? Jack and his awkwardness? The revelation of the truth, the consequences?

11. Iris, her upset, unable to respond to Jack? Hannah, her embarrassment, yet the reconciliation with her sister? Jack, his decision to leave? His camping in the woods?

12. The final reconciliation, discussion of things, forgiveness, understanding? The possibilities for the future?

THE FAIRY

France/Belgium, 2011, 94 minutes, Colour.
Dominique Abel, Fiona Gordon, Bruno Romy.
Directed by Dominque Abel, Fiona Gordon, Bruno Romy.

The Fairy is an absurd fairy tale, slapstick with the light touch. It is the third film from the trio who star and direct. The first film was Iceberg (2005) and the entertaining Rumba (2008).

The film could be described as whimsical. It is not realistic – though some of the sequences, absurd as well as humorous, blend the real and the surreal.

The film has minimal plot, focuses on the characters, humorous situations, touches of madness.

It is probably not to everyone’s taste, but for those who are fans of the trio, it is entertaining.

1. The work of the trio? Writing, directing, acting? Their idiosyncratic personalities, performances?

2. The title? The focus on the fairy herself, coming to the hotel, the interaction with Dom, the episodes in their life? Her character? The three wishes, the pregnancy, the childbirth?

3. Dom, in Le Havre, the hotel receptionist? The introduction, his wanting his TV dinner, the bell ringing, the visitor with the dog, British? The forbidding of pets – but his bringing back the dog in the suitcase? The jokes with the dog in the case, barking and running around?

4. Fiona arriving, her deadpan look, down-to-earth, her decision to give Dom three wishes? His trouble with the sandwich and her helping him not choke? The going into the sea, the dancing, the seaweed? The shellfish?

5. Fiona’s pregnancy, the hospital, the mental institution? The lead-in to the car chase? (And the rear projection?) The birth, the baby and its being on the back of the car?

6. The physical comedy? The slapstick? The dancing and movement? The music – the woman rugby player and her song?

7. Background characters – especially the trio, the young African men, the desire to get across the English Channel, Britain as their goal? Their failure?

8. The role of the police? Ineffectual – comic cops?

9. The childbirth sequence and its impact? The fairy and the experience? Dom and his bewilderment?

10. The cumulative effect of the characters, the incidents, the comedy – with the touch of the twee and the fey?

SPEED

US, 1936, 70 minutes, Black and white.
James Stewart, Wendy Barrie, Una Merkel, Ted Healy, Ralph Morgan.
Directed by Edwin L. Marin.

Speed is a story of cars, their making and testing. It was an early film of James Stewart who portrays a driver who is working on a new carburettor. He loves driving fast – and there are some scenes of testing cars at great speeds which will entertain the car enthusiasts. However, he is a practical person, not wanting to work in the office or in theory. He encounters a young woman who is a PR for the firm – in fact, the niece of the owner. They meet, he falls in love, they clash, he misinterprets her interest in a worker in the office.

Ted Healy, the founder of The Three Stooges, portrays his assistant, Gadget, getting some humorous lines, as well as some ironic romantic scenes.

The film is fairly conventional – though, in the tour of the car manufacturing company, it is almost like a documentary portraying how cars were made, assembled, tested in the 1930s.

The film is an opportunity to see James Stewart at the age of twenty-seven, thin and lanky, but with something of the screen persona he was to employ over the next sixty years or so.

THE VISITOR

Italy, 1979, 92 minutes, Colour.
Mel Ferrer, Glenn Ford, John Huston, Shelley Winters, Joanne Nail, Lance Henriksen, Sam Peckinpah.
Directed by Giulio Paradisi.

The Visitor must be one of the oddest films of the 1970s. It is an American- Italian Co-production. The synopsis and the advertising put out some very serious themes. However, as one sits through the film, one wonders about the origins of the plot, the seriousness of the presentation and the company having its audience on.

There is quite a good star line-up, doing satiric turns of characters they have performed in many other films. The plot is far-fetched and done with such a variety of styles, including parodies of many occult films and science-fiction like close encounters of the third kind, but one wonders about the intentions.
Clearly the film is in the tradition of so many of the occult films of the 1970s. But it also looks like the humorous, exaggerated satires, for example, Mario Bava’s House of Exorcism where Telly Savalas is the central star, even with his Kojak lollipops.

A curiosity item of a rather lavish kind.

1. The nineteen seventies and the popularity of occult films? The appeal, themes? The familiarity by the end of the seventies with the conventions of the genre? The possibilities for taking them seriously? Satirically? The basic themes of evil babies, other-worldly powers, the presence of evil within the ordinary world? The clash between good and evil? How seriously, humorously were these conventions used? The stars and their typical roles: John Huston as the grizzled old man, Mel Ferrer as the suave villain, Glenn Ford as a very American detective and his seeming lack of relatedness to the rest of the film, only to be killed in a parody of The Birds, Shelley Winters as the talkative but sinister maid? The guest appearance of Sam Peckinpah?

2. The production values of the film, large budget? American locations? Italian finance? The styles of the film and their variations, the other world and celestial background of the beginning, America and business, Atlanta? American homes? Special effects, especially at the beginning, the attack of the birds?

3. How easy was it to tell whether the film was serious or comic? Tone, characterization, plot, themes, dialogue?

4. The initial encounter with Jerzy? An other-worldly character? The appearance of Katy? the universe and space? The build-up to the cosmic battle? The children and their listening to Fy and Franco Nero in an uncredited role? Fy as a seeming Christ-figure, gentle preaching? Overtones of the film, Superman?

5. Good children and evil children and the background of Rosemary’s Baby? That cloaked figure of Katy in the wind and the swirling snow? Her confrontation with Jerzy, and overtones of the omen?

6. Jerzy as the visitor? His coming to earth, his role in the household, the confrontations with Katy, the final battles? The importance of Jane and her presence in the house? The sinister maid? The good maid? The protection of Barbara, the confrontation with Katy?

7. The background explanation of mothers able to give birth to mutant and evil children? Barbara and her capacity? Katy and her presence to make sure the child was born? Barbara as an ordinary character, divorcee, ex-husband, her relationship with Raymond? Her care for her daughter? The friendship with Dr. Walker? The various threats on her life and their exaggerated violence? Her surviving all these attempts?

8. Katy and her attitudes towards her mother, her mother’s love for her daughter but yet suspicions? The build-up to the close encounter and the impregnation of Barbara? Her horror at her pregnancy, the discussions about the abortion, the hospital sequence, Dr. Walker, the protecting of the unborn child?

9. Dr. Walker and his suave but sinister presence? Raymond and his love for Barbara and his being part of the conspiracy? Reality and appearances? The romantic ingredients of the film?

10. The final confrontation, Barbara and all that she had gone through and revived from? Katy and her becoming a monster and attacking her mother, that torture and murder of Barbara with Raymond? Jerzy and his arrival, the contact with the extra-terrestrial forces, the specks of light in the night, the speeding towards Earth, the flock of birds and the crashing through the skylight, the saving of Barbara, the attacking of Raymond and, Dr. Walker and his death? The return to Fy and his class, and the irony of sweet Katy’s presence, her being exorcised? The

11. To what purpose this kind of film, entertaining in itself if taken straightforwardly, the strong satirising of the film genres of the seventies, the parodies, the mocking of the audience and enjoying this kind of film?

RIDDICK

US, 2013, 119 minutes, Colour.
Vin Diesel, Jordi Molla, Matt Nable, Bokeem Woodbine, Karl Urban.
Directed by David Twohey.

You have to be a strong Vin Diesel fan to sit through Riddick. And, of course, Diesel does have his fans who will relish this film. Box-office returns for this film and for the Fast and Furious franchise, seem to indicate that his fan base is growing. He has a particular screen presence, physically tough which belies the shrewdness of intelligence that the screenplay spells out for his character.

It is thirteen years since Riddick first appeared on screen, in a science fiction film set on an alien planet, Pitch Black. It made quite an impact on his fans at the time and a sequel went into production, the Chronicles of Riddick where Diesel had as a co-star, Judi Dench. Now, with Diesel having proven himself as fast and furious, he is back as Riddick.

You know whether you are going to enjoy the film or not during the first fifteen minutes and whether you pay attention or find that your mind is wandering. It is totally Riddick. Well, that is not perhaps entirely true, because on this alien planet where he has been banished, there are a number of deadly prehistoric-looking creatures, sinister dingo-like dogs and even more sinister large eel-like reptiles in the pools. Riddivk has to spend a long, long time fighting them, suffering grievous wounds and enduring an enormous amount of pain. There is a flashback interlude going back to his previous career and the accusations of murder as well as his being exiled. However, that first half hour or more indicates that this is definitely a film about Riddick.

But this is well calculated by the screenplay because Riddick virtually goes off screen for act two, when space ships arrive on the planet to bring him back, dead or alive. One team is a group of bounty hunters led by Jordi Molla, a really unpleasant type, with equally unpleasant henchmen, and a relentless determination to get Riddick and put his head in a box cage. The other group a more organized, led Boss Johns (Australian Matt Nable) who believes that Riddick has murdered his young son and is out to find the truth and some justice or vengeance.

The group spent a lot of time bickering amongst each other, many flashpoints with the only female in the team, presented as butch as the men. Riddick is able to pin the grou down, tantalising them by infiltrating their centre and then disappearing. Which makes them all the more determined.

But, by the third act, Riddick is back with the two teams, even trapped by them. But also returning are some of the creatures. They loudly attack the headquarters, terrifying everyone and killing of some of the unwary. It all builds up to a desperate cycle ride through the desert, pursued by the creatures, Riddick disempowered and almost destroyed… But…

The alien planet is a desert and mountain place, little vegetation, and with a yellow streaked sky. There is a thumping score. There are lots of action bouts and confrontations - lots and lots. There are the computer-generated creatures to contribute to the eerie atmosphere. And there is always Riddick, Vin Diesel older, bigger, more muscles, more capacity for endurance, laconic, but with a redeeming characteristic that he has tamed one of the ferocious dogs who has become fiercely loyal to him.

David Twohey as written the screenplay. He has written some interesting screenplays like Perfect Getaway and Secret Window. But with this one, he has some less than literary dialogue, peppered with four-letter ‘what the…’, ‘shut the…’, which seem like those word-bubbles in panels of comic strips.

And, at the end, Riddick is in a spacecraft flying off into a possible sequel.

1. The character and personality of Riddick? From the previous films? Audience interest in him and his adventures, accepting him?

2. Vin Diesel and his screen presence, as Riddick, tough, the loner, his adventures?

3. Science fiction, inter-planetary life? The visuals of space, the planets, the landscapes, the mountains, the desert, sky and weather? Science fiction terrain?

4. The creatures, the dogs, the water creatures? Special effects?

5. The space and travel, the space vehicles, the technology, in action, the stunts?

6. Riddick and his life, the flashbacks, his position on the planet, the accusations, the leaders ousting him, the flight, his enemies abandoning him, the fall, survival?

7. The first 30 minutes, Riddick and the dangers, the fights, hiding, the creatures, the wounds, his pain? Surviving? Shelter? Taming the animal, as a companion? Seeking food? Hiding?

8. The bounty hunters, on screen for the second act and Riddick withdrawing? The leader, his Spanish language, his henchmen, brutal? Tough, the box for Riddick’s head, getting the bounty? The pursuit of Riddick? His eluding them?

9. The second spacecraft, the commander, the woman soldier, the rest of the crew, the mission, motivations?

10. The two groups, their aims, the clashes, the bounty hunter and his attack on the woman? Lesbian? His taunts? The black member of the crew? The boss? Riddick infiltrating, tricking them, appearing and disappearing, sabotage? Tying them up?

11. Riddick, his appearance, confrontations, clashes, fights? His being taken, interrogation, the box for his head? The confrontation with the bounty hunter, slicing his head off? The boss, the discussions about his son, member of the crew, cowardice? Riddick and his sexual clashes with the woman?

12. The creatures, the destruction, on the roof of the building, the deaths and disappearances? The characters, their fears, dealing with the creatures?

13. The commander, on the bike, seeking the batteries, the plan, confronting the creatures, the fights, the woman and her killing the creatures?

14. Riddick, rescued, the truth about the commander’s son?

15. The final decision, the completion of the mission, Riddick and his going into space - and a sequel?

THE ROCKET

Australia, 2013, 90 minutes, Colour.
Sitthiphon Dimasoe, Loungnam Kaosainam.
Directed by Kim Mordaunt.


The Rocket is a film well worth seeing.

It is a collaboration between Screen Australia and film producers in Laos. We do not see many, if any, films from Laos about Laotian people and their way of life. This film serves as a good introduction for outsiders to enter into Laos, experience the problems of village people, and see what is happening in this, for Australians and many other nations, remote country, part of Indochina, the but seemingly squeezed in between Vietnam, Cambodia, Thailand, Burma and China.

The film was written and directed by Australian Kim Mordaunt. He shows a great familiarity with the people in the country and has found ways of introducing them to others. He had previously made a documentary, Bomb Harvest, in Laos in 2007, and draws on some elements for this story.

The central character is a young boy, Ahlo, played engagingly by Sitthiphon Disamoe. In the prologue to the film, we are introduced to animist type religious behaviour with a grandmother carrying the head of an ox to a ritual shrine. It is for the safe birthing of the little boy. The process is complex and the mother delivers twins, one of whom is stillborn, which moves the grandmother to conceal his existence and decide that the living boy is cursed.

After some years, the boy and his family are living a quiet but poor existence in their village, he catching fish and selling them in the market. But fliers are handed out to indicate that a second dam is being built in the vicinity and that their valley will be flooded. This Laotian story is quite prominent in other countries of Asia, China having produced several films in recent years that show the repercussions of dam building on poor people and their having to relocate.

The people generally accept their fate and begin to move. During the film a tragedy occurs which has repercussions on the family. They try to settle, but are continually moved on. They encounter a strange and alcoholic man who has fought as a soldier in the wars of the 1970s. He looks like American singer James Brown and cultivates this impression, especially with his purple coat. He has a little niece and he protects her. Ahlo and the little niece, Kia, meet, become friends, collect flowers to sell in the market. However, Ahlo is also accident prone and causes many problems in the settlement and his family tent is destroyed by fire by the vengeful people.

On they go. On the way they are in danger of unexploded bombs and grenades left from the war era. But this explosive theme is continued because they reach a village where there is a rocket competition. The rockets are being fired into the air as a ritual praying for rain for their drought stricken region.

The rocket competition has its amusing side, especially as the young boy decides that he is going to build a rocket to beat all others, to get some money and some land so that the family will not hurt goes there to the city to work in factories back and stay in the land. The grandmother is a harsh and critical old woman – she could well have been in the rocket and fired into space!

This review will not spoil the ending but there will be no need for handkerchiefs and tears.

The location photography in Laos as most impressive, especially the strange-shaped high-reaching mountains. The film has an authentic feel with the local people performing. The plot is complex but designed to make its points in 90 minutes running time. However, Ahlo win over most audiences and persuade them that they should pay more attention to Laos and its people.

1. The popularity of the film? Awards?

2. An introduction to rural Laos? For locals, for outsiders, for the Australian audience? A close-up in images and stories?

3. The title, Ahlo and his achievement, but living through a difficult story?

4. Laos, cut off from the rest of Indochina, its traditions, colonial impositions, the land, animist religion, belief in luck? The cultural experience?

5. The grandmother bringing the head of the ox, the prayer and ritual? The difficult birth of the twins, one dying, decision not to tell the father? The curse of the twin? The grandmother and her superstitions, blaming Arlo?

6. Arlo and his life, at home, his age, fishing, selling the fish and the market, his boat?

7. His mother, her joy at home, the mangoes? With Arlo? Her husband, his work, love, ordinary life?

8. The information sheets distributed in the village, the need to move, the second dam, the hopes about the house, the crowds leaving, crossing the bridge? Arlo wanting to take his boat, and the mangoes her future planning? The box, pulling the boat up the hill, everyone pushing, the mother, her necklace, stopping, the reverse of the boat, her death, the shock? Her burial?

9. The father, quiet, his work, love for his boy? The grandmother, her harshness, the boat, blaming Ahlo?

10. The grandmother, tough, the ox head, wanting the abortion, her age, her criticisms, the curse, on the move, and her later change of heart?

11. Arrival in the camp, the tents, hardships, lack of water, trying to settle? The attention to detail in the camp?

12. Kia and her uncle, Purple? Purple in himself, his age, having been a soldier, with the Americans, his drinking, his likeness to James brown, his purple shirt? The grenades and his warnings? His forbidding Kia to play with Ahlo? But joining him? Kia, friendship with Ahlo, getting the flowers, selling them, the market, their friendship, happy together? Arguments?

13. The disasters for Ahlo, the curse, Ahlo and his behaviour, his beliefs, stealing, the burial ground, the chase, the fire and the house burning down, the neighbours and their revenge? Moving on, the new place, the bats, the grenades?

14. The town, the rockets and the competition, the need for rain? The festival, the judges? Building a rocket, the father and his involvement? His love, its failure?

15. Ahlo, the bat, the help from Purple, rockets, asking his father for help, collecting material, urinating on the bat excrement? Using it for the explosion?

16. The prize, cash and land, the grandmother’s reaction, critical, the father, worrying about Ahlo, his running away, Kia and her help? Setting it off?

17. The family wanting to stay on the land, not go to the city for work in the factory? The firing of the rocket, the reaction of the people, the judges, the grandmother? Ahlo and his success? His happiness? The final close up?