Displaying items by tag: Peter Malone's Movie Reviews

HAVOC

US, 2025, 107 minutes, Colour.

Tom Hardy, Jessie Mae Li, Justin Cornwell, Quelin Sepulveda, Timothy Olyphant, Forest Whitaker, Sunny Pang, Jeremy Ang Jones, Yann Yann Yeo, Michelle Waterson.

Directed by Gareth Evans.

As audiences watch Havoc, they will realise that havoc is an understatement.

This is a very violent film that will appeal only to diehard fans of violent films, police action, drug deals, triads, the mayhem beyond havoc. The initial appeal will be for those who are fans of director, Gareth Evans, who made his name with films in Indonesia, Merentau, The Raid: Redemption, The Raid 2. They were both action stories very violent.

The setting for this film is an unnamed American city, elements of Chicago and New York. The audience is introduced to a cop, played by Tom Hardy, involved in shady deals and corruption, separated from his wife and child. He is one of those independent cops, tough, ruthless, but suggestions of a humane character underneath the surface. He has to work with a new partner, played by Jessie Mae Li who, by the end of the film, shows she can be quite a tough cop as well.

There are the local political issues, a corrupt politician, played unexpectedly by Forest Whitaker, aiming for re-election and alleged reform of the city. He has relied on Hardy’s character to get him out of difficulties earlier. Hardy wants out. But he is pressurised to search for the politician’s son who has been involved in drug dealing as well as a robbery of washing machines and a huge lorry, and the massacre of a young drug dealer, involved with Chinese triads in the US.

Early in the film there is a spectacular chase sequence, the lorry veering through the city onto the freeway, police cars in pursuit – and the revelation that they are not after the criminals but after the drugs in the truck.

The drivers of the truck, the politician’s son and his girlfriend, go to meet the young Triad leader – but, there is a massacre. The consequences for everyone quite dramatically dire – the young couple fleeing, the imperious mother of the young Chinese coming from China with her female bodyguard assassin, devoted to her son, determined to avenge him.

There are various complications, especially when we learn that the police chasing the truck were in fact corrupt and after the drugs, led by Timothy Olyphant. The contact at the Chinese club has betrayed the young man and his mother, determined to have the money. He is also upset by being passed over for the hierarchy of the dealers.

A lot of complications, Hardy in action, the young woman helping him, confrontations with the police, a great number of violent fights, graphically presented, weapons, slit throats… And final confrontation with very few survivors.

The film would take its place in the history of violent action films especially because of the career of Gareth Evans. And the presence of Tom Hardy.

TINA (MOTHER)

New Zealand, 2025, 124 minutes, Colour.

Anapela Polataivao, Antonia Robinson, Dalip Sondhi, Jamie Irvine

Directed by Miki Magasiva.

A New Zealand film. Setting: Christchurch (and a vivid reminder of the 2019 earthquake). Location: elite St Francis School, Christchurch. Focus, Samoan choir teacher, Mareta. Special feature: a great deal of choral music.

With the title, Tina, it is not the central character’s name. Rather, pronunciation-wise, there is an emphasis on the a of Tina and the parenthesis indicating that it actually means Mother). And the screenplay is very definite at some moments indicating that Samoa is pronounced with the emphasis on the initial a rather than on the o!

Audiences may well anticipate many of the directions in which this film is going, the teacher, her personal tragedies, opportunities at the school, the students and their behaviour, the school authorities, music, choir, the possibilities of participation in a competition. However, there are many variations on the theme as the film progresses, drawing in the audience, sympathies, hopes, enjoyment of the music.

The strength of the film comes from the presence of Samoan-born New Zealand actress, Anapela Polataivo (a presence in a great number of significant New Zealand films and television series). She is a powerful screen presence – demanding of those she comes in contact with, commanding attention, especially of ourselves, the audience.

She plays Mareta, talented with music and singing, encouraging her daughter to do an audition for a scholarship in music to a British university. And then the earthquake. A devastating effect on Mareta, grieving, upset, unable to settle for three years until challenged by a young man she cared for with her family, now in the bank, urging her to go for a job interview.

In fact, she takes charge of the interview with the school authorities at St Francis of Assisi, a very up-market high school, school uniforms, everything orderly, discipline to the fore, and very elitist presumptions and  attitudes of staff and students. They are certainly not used to having anyone of Samoan origin on the staff, especially with her brightly coloured Polynesian dresses, their urging her to tone down.

Members of the staff are rather expected, some kindly and understanding, the vice principal almost a caricature of the ambitious, controlling, indignant racist school authority.

But, of course, the main thrust of the film and its enjoyment is Mareta’s encouragement of a very disturbed but talented young musician, encouraging volunteers for the choir, getting them involved, Polynesian musical traditions, some enthusiasm, ambitions, (some clashes between priorities of football and choir), a blend of confrontations and enthusiasm.

The final competition is very enjoyable, singing from several colleges but, the great climax and zest in the grand finale.

One hopes that younger audiences will identify with some of the issues and enjoy the film. But, for most audiences, it is pleasingly entertaining.

1. The title, Samoan for mother, not the name of the central character?
2. The Christchurch setting, the vistas of the city, the impact of the earthquake, the poorer neighbourhoods, St Francis School and its elie settings, banks and offices, the final choir competition?
3. The importance of music, Mareta at the beginning, the piano, her teaching, her supporting her daughter for her audition? The background score? Mareta at the school, building up the choir, singing, the traditional rubbing and waving of hands, the Polynesian songs, Nearer My God to The, the final concert?
4. Mareta and her story, born in Samoa, living in New Zealand, her work at the school, her friends, her daughter and her severity with her daughter, the phone call, the daughter’s nervousness about the audition, supporting her? The earthquake, Mareta and the experience, trying to contact her daughter, going to the ruins, her daughter’s body?
5. Mareta, opting out, years of grief, alone, going to the bank, the young man she helped when he was young, his advice, that she go for an interview, to keep her financial support? The recommendation that she go to St Francis school?
6. The encounter with Sophie, her scarred hands, playing the piano, Mareta playing, urging her to sing? The bonding between the two, and yet her independence and surly responses, lack of self-confidence, her medication, the severe relationship with her mother, her place at school?
7. The interview with the school board, the members, the deputy principal and his superiority, Alan and his sympathy, Mareta speaking very bluntly? The substitute teacher, going to the class, supervising?
8. The ethos of the school, elite, the attitude of the staff, the uniforms, the disciplined walking, the meetings in the hall, the speeches from the deputy principal, the importance of football? The personality of the deputy, his attitudes, superior, racist, the interactions with Mareta? The sympathetic teachers? Alan, his support, yet the spirit of the school, a falling out with Mareta, his change of heart?
9. The possibility for the choir, the volunteers, her getting them to rub hands, the movements? Is coming for the choir? The selection? The characters, the footballer and the challenge to his position with the sport, the Asian girl and her assertiveness, the enthusiastic girl with glasses…? Sophie, a reluctance, the encouragement, inviting her to sing and lead? The rehearsals?
10. The reaction, the staff? Mareta and her seeing the head of the board and his treatment of the player, her being called before the board, his attitudes, racist?
11. The working with the group, the enjoyment of the rehearsals, the background of the Samoan church, the priest and his support, the congregation, dressing in white, the choir? In the school choir coming, singing, applauds? Confidence?
12. Mareta, her perseverance, the ups and downs with Alan, her defiance, the possibility for the competition?
13. Sophie, her moods, refusing to whether lava lava, walking out? Mareta and her patience?
14. The footballer, the meeting with the coach, the board had, the deputy principal, the boy and his choice? The anger of the head of the board?
15. The concert, competition, the other schools and their performances? Background, Sophie inviting her mother, nervous, walking out, returning in costume, her carred shoulder, leading the group, the enthusiasm of the performance, the audience?
16. The film ending on this high? And the film’s audience finishing on a high?

SMALL THINGS LIKE THESE

Ireland, 2024, 95 minutes, Colour.

Cillian Murphy, Eileen Walsh, Zara Devlin, Emily Watson, Michelle Fairlry.

Directed by Tim Mielants.

This film is based on the Booker-prize nominee by Irish novelist, Claire Keegan. Another of her stories, Foster, was filmed as The Quiet Girl, the dialogue in Gaelic. She is a multi-award-winning novelist.

The setting for this film is a town in Ireland, 1985. At the centre is a very serious man, Will, who is a coal deliverer in the town. He is married, a sympathetic wife, played by Eileen Walsh, and household of daughters. He is played by Cillian Murphy, Oscar-winner at this time for Oppenheimer but a veteran of more than 30 years of Irish and international films. Here is a powerful performance but the performance is greatly enhanced by the way that he is photographed throughout the film, so often close-ups, extreme close-ups of his face, the silent body language communicating his experiences, many sad memories, difficulties in the present, dark and brooding.

For an intense film about Ireland, it has been directed by Belgian director, Tim Mielants, who worked with Cillian Murphy directing six episodes of the series, Peaky Blinders, as well as making the intense war film about the German occupation of Antwerp, Wil. Actor and director worked together in their next film, Steve.

There are quite a number of flashbacks to Will and his boyhood, his unmarried mother and their being taken on by a wealthy and kindly widow. Nevertheless, some harsh treatment by the children at school, emphasising his isolation, his self-doubt.

His work is delivering coal, his oldest daughter working with the accounts. His wife is sympathetic, but not always appreciating the depths of his inner thoughts and feelings.

What brings this to a head is the experience of his finding one of the young women who are unmarried and pregnant and committed to the care of nuns in what were called the Magdalenes. She is Sarah and has been locked in the coal room and he discovers her. He brings her out, some confrontations with the nuns, an encounter with the superior, played by Emily Watson. Emily Watson’s Sister Mary embodies those characteristics, many good, many far too severe, of superiors in past times. She is in control, demanding, wanting discipline, actually encouraging a harsh regime, structures, hard work, discipline, the sisters in the convent to exercise this kind of control.

In 2002, Peter Mullan directed The Magdalene Sisters, a strong expose of those times. Small Things like These is a significant companion film.

In his interview with Sister Mary, who knows the family well, she is able to threaten, cajole, control, Will begins to brood even more on the  the nuns, the church, unmarried mothers, the fate of the children, his sense of duty, a sense of responsibility.

As the film moves in this direction, Will rescuing Sarah a second time, taking her home, their walking down the corridor of his house to…, the film abruptly stops, surprising the audience in their reflections, emotional responses, which they now have to take out from their film experience to ponder.

1. The reputation of the novel by Claire Keegan? The adaptation, short running time, the focus on characters, 1985 and the situations, the flashbacks?
2. Ireland, 1985, families, home life, father, mother, the daughters, the small home, the family life? The father and the delivery of the coal?
3. Life in the town, the Catholic Church, Christmastime, in the church? The nuns?
4. The gradual revelation about the institutions for the Magdalenes, young girls, unmarried mothers, sent by their parents and family, the hardships, the hard work, domestic, laundries, cooking, the pregnancies, the babies? The role of the nuns, the severity, discipline, harsh treatment, Sarah locked in the coal room? The role of the superior, seeing her with the priest, the interview with Will, the awkward situation, her knowledge of him and the family, his daughters and the school, the fees? The money gift for his wife? Her warning him away? Her treatment of Sarah, seemingly benign, the wash, food? Sarah again in the cold room? The film’s judgement on the sisters, the Catholic Church and severity, judgmental on the young women, treatment of them?
5. Will as a person, the flashbacks to his past, his mother, the bond with her, the reaction of the other children, their treatment of him, the spit on his coat? His mother cleaning it off? Taken in by Mrs Wilson, Mrs Wilson and her wealth, the household, the kindness to Will and his mother? The effect on Will as he grew up?
6. The adult Will as a personality, quiet, brooding, relationship with his wife, the domestic scenes, with his children, the oldest and her accountancy, the interaction with the others, music, the meals, happy times? And the memories of his past? His devotion to his work? Other friends in the town, communication, the visit to the pub?
7. The impact of finding Sophie with the coal, having glimpsed her with her parents and her reluctance? Rescuing her, the interview with Sister Mary, Sister Mary and her manipulation of the conversation, affirmation, yet threats, the gift of the money?
8. Sarah and her difficulties again, Will and his rescue, bring her to the home, preparing to walk down the corridor, to…?
9. The suddenness, abruptness of the ending, the audience processing all that has gone before, anticipation of what is to come, taking this away for reflection after viewing the film?

THE CORRESPONDENT

Australia, 2025, 119 minutes, Colour.

Richard Roxburgh, Julian Maroun, Rahel Romahn, Mojean Aria, Yael Stone, Nicholas Cassim, Faysall Bazzi, John Bell, Anna Volska...

Directed by Kriv Standers.

Peter Greste was a significant international journalist, covering uprisings and wars. At Christmas 2013, he agreed to stand in for several weeks in Cairo, working for Al Jazeera. This was the period of unrest in Egypt, the election of Morsi as Pres, the rule of The Muslim Brotherhood, then his overthrow by military coup and the leadership of Fattah el-Sisi. It was a period of unrest and civil demonstrations.

This is a film, based on Peter Greste’s memoir, of his time in an Egyptian prison, 400 days plus. The screenplay, effectively re-creating the period, the hardships of the internment, the injustices of the courts, was written by screenwriter and director, Peter Duncan. And the strong impact of the drama is communicated by one of his best performances by Richard Roxburgh.

The film was made in Australia, incorporating television footage from the period, a strong cast of Australian actors with Middle Eastern backgrounds. There is also a special cameo appearance by veteran Shakespearean actor, John Bell, with his wife, and Oscar, as Peter Greste’s parents.

For audiences not knowing the story of Krista himself, the focus will be on identifying with him and the sudden arrest, no explanations, harsh and rough treatment, interrogations, prison clothes, his cell, isolation, Egypt’s are remote from Australia, hope to help from the Australian Embassy, the uncertainty of what would happen, what could happen. He is supported by some of the fellow prisoners, by a young enthusiastic wants to be a journalist, as well is the internment of his two fellow workers for Al Jazeera, one sustaining injuries and eventually being taken to hospital, the other with wife and family, uncertain of his future.

As with this kind of story, there will be audience in dictation at the treatment of the journalist, at the fabricated charges, of the reading into is work of espionage and promotion of propaganda hostile to Egypt. The appointed defence lawyer is pressurised to publicly resign. The judge of the case issues a harsh seven year sentence.

Throughout the narrative of the internment, there are continued flashbacks to an experience in Somalia where Greste was working with an associate, Kate Payton, her impending marriage, their going into Mogadishu, uprisings, shootings, her being wounded… And, this episode being used by the prosecutor, twisted to condemn Greste

The latter part of the film, there are the issues of the long sentence, the possibility of appeal, the turning down of appeals, the possibility for hunger strikes in protest…

As expected, this is a very sombre film, audiences identifying with a journalist deprived of his freedom while doing his work, the harsh and isolating experience of the prisoner, and the relief when the issue is resolved.

But, for Greste himself, the case continues and he has continued support for all journalists, and several journalists in particular cases, who are unjustly imprisoned. And there is the alarming final statistic, after the real-life sequence of Greste’s release from prison, of the number of journalists who have been killed in action in the 2020s or arenas of, especially, Gaza and Ukraine.

1. Audience knowledge of Peter Greste and his imprisonment in Egypt, 2013-2015? Australia? For the world? The journalists and freedom worldwide?
2. The background, Peter Greste as journalist, age and experience, worldwide, the background of the story and the death in Somalia, doing a favour to take three weeks in Cairo, working for Al Jazeera?
3. The Egyptian situation, from the mid-1950s and the Suez crisis, NASA, Sadat, Mubarek, the Muslim Brotherhood, Morsi, the uprisings in North Africa from 2010? The situation in Egypt? Hostility towards The Muslim Brotherhood?
4. Greste at his hotel, out in the streets, the commentary about the uprisings? In his hotel, the police arriving, no identification, the demands, opening his safe, the threats, arresting him?
5. Audiences identifying with Peter Greste, the suddenness of the situation, no explanations, the treatment? His two colleagues being arrested? Interrogations, searches, prison gear, the cell? The isolation? The two colleagues, one with the injury, eventually going to hospital? The other and his friendship, situation at home with his wife and child? And the episodes are playing backgammon, with the prisoners, with the Major?
6. Peter Greste and his interchanges with the enthusiastic young man, wanting to be a journalist, enthusiastic, idealistic, supportive and Greste, his long sentence?
7. Time passing, the internment, the charges, political, subverting the government, planting international propaganda against the government? The hearings, the discussions? The severity of the interviews? The lawyer appointed to defend, the pressure on him, his public resignation?
8. The dramatic significance of intercutting the episode in Somalia, at various stages during the internment, building up the episode chronologically, Greste and his life, his ex-wife, women, with Kate, the mission in Mogadishu, his relationship with her, her intended wedding, the episode of the uprising, the shooting, her being wounded, transported, hospital, dying? And the interrogator using this episode to condemn Greste for not protecting Kate?
9. The visit from the Australian Embassy, unable to do much? The later contacts, the visits, the support?
10. The involvement of his brother, the visit from his mother and father, the family bonds, the Latvian background coming to Australia? Their work behind the scenes? The visit from the Latvian Embassy, the Latvian passport for him?
11. The long time passing, more than a year in internment? The bonding with some of the prisoners, the difficulties in language and translation, especially with the guards and their treatment? The backgammon games?
12. The case, the judge, the severity of the sentence, seven years? The response?
13. The issue of the appeal, world opinion, journalist uniting, articles in the media? The nature of the appeal, formulating the appeal? The issue of what would happen if it were not accepted? The prisoner and the issue of the hunger strike? Peter Greste and the determination for the appeal, the downturn, the hunger strike? The visit of his brother?
14. Behind-the-scenes, the interventions, the authorities coming to the cell, telling him that he could go, the farewell to his friend?
15. The return to Australia, Peter Greste and his campaigns ever since, supportive of journalists and freedom of the press? The news that the fellow workers were pardoned after seven more months?
16. A strong drama, a strong screen for freedom of the press and the work of journalists? And the statistics about so many deaths, especially in the 2020s, Gaza and Ukraine?

WARFARE

US/UK, 2025, 95 minutes, Colour.

D' Pharaoh Woon-A-Tai, Will Poulter, Cosmo Jarvis, Joseph Quinn, Aaron Mackenzie, Finn Bennett, Michael Gandolfini, Charles Melton, John Taylor Smith, Kit Connor, Noah Centineo.

Directed by Ray Mendoza, Alex Garland.

Ultimately, this is a very grim film. Many audiences will find some sequences unbearable to watch. But, this is a film of warfare.

The action of the film takes place over an evening and morning, the morning action seems to take place in real time. It is Iraq, 2006, three years after the American invasion. The audiences with occupying American forces. There are hostile Iraqis ready to attack, to serve as snipers against the Americans. And there are ordinary Iraqis, seen going about their ordinary business in the streets, shops, chatting… And there are the victims of the action, homes taken over for confronting the enemy, homes destroyed.

The film was cowritten and co-directed by Ray Mendoza, his own memories of the episode and the film noting at the opening that this is a version of memories rather than an objective study of what happened in the mission. In the film, Mendoza is the radio operator, most important for contact, for surveillance, for final rescue details. Mendoza is working with screenwriter and

director, Alex Garland (Ex Machina, Annihilation, Men) who startled many audiences with his imaginative version of conflict within the United States, Civil War.

The American cast, although the lead is Canadian and several significant actors are British (many of them familiar from films and from television series), recreate the camaraderie of the group, the film opening with a moment of shock for the audience with close-ups of an aerobics TV program, the group together, a lot of ogling, comment, the suggestion of boys being boys…

But, the cast went through several weeks boot camp, training in methods of warfare, but also the behaviour of soldiers under stress, in situations of attack and defence, rehearsing not only the action sequences but the collaboration of the men in moments of waiting, in moments of tension.

Audiences will be intrigued by the discipline and the manoeuvres for the men to get from their headquarters to occupy a home in the street, opposite a building which is under suspicion. Then there is the waiting, for something to happen, for someone to shoot, for more information to come from headquarters. Audiences share these moments of nothing happening, time passing, yet having to be on the ready.

The action sequences are vivid, but best described by the word, visceral (or, perhaps, gut-churning), for the men’s experience as well as for the audience’s experience: snipers, response, mistakes made, men wounded, calls for evacuating the wounded, explosions, and, another warning about the graphic close-ups of injured and dead men, listening to their screams, the pain, the cry for morphine, just the unbearable pain of being carried, the rescue. This is an alert to audiences who might find some of these sequences also unbearable.

So, in no way as an entertainment entertainment. Rather, an intense drama, the filmmakers’ serious attempt to immerse its audience in both the calm and the intense death reality of warfare.

1. The truth of the title? The focus on the American invasion of Iraq, and episode, 2006? The presence of Ray Mendoza in the operation? His memories, the writing of the screenplay, collaboration with Alex Garland and his reputation, interests, war? Mendoza and the staging of the action, memories of the experience?
2. Audience response to war, just wars, unjust wars, invasions? For the troops in the war? For those hostile to the troops? For ordinary people as victims of war?
3. The graphic presentation of the action, the action, the shooting, deaths, the close-ups of graphic wounds, limbs lost, soldiers in pain, screams, asking for morphine…? Audience identification, shock, uncomfortable, some seems almost unbearable to watch? Style of the film sometimes muting the sound, some moments of relief for the audience from the screaming?
4. The opening, the aerobics session, the glamorous participants, the group watching, ogling, irritating, the sexual atmosphere, the boys will be boys atmosphere?
5. The transition to the next morning, the men, so young, their training, the role of surveillance, support of the mission, details not understood but obeying the orders for support?
6. The realism of the film, the atmosphere of it unfolding in real time?
7. The group, their drill, in the streets, in line, plan, snipers, invading the house, the terror of the inhabitants, their being put together downstairs, the men deploying in the house, the sniper and his assistant, the radio operator, the tasks of the various men?
8. The eye of the sniper, his descriptions, the radio operator taking notes, the backup of headquarters aerial surveillance, the audience seeing the surveillance, from a high distance, the white dots indicating personnel and vehicles?
9. The seeming ordinariness of the street, shops, men and women, walking, wandering, the number of men passing by, going into the building? Their being described to headquarters? Suspicions?
10. The relief sniper, seeing the men with guns, not getting off a shot? The plan going awry? The range of snipers, their action, the dangers? Coming onto the roof of the building?
11. The action of the camera, during the quiet time panning around and catching people doing their jobs, some repartee, urinating into the bottle, chatter?
12. The camera in action during the bombardment, the roof, blowing the roof? Elliott and his being wounded? The contact with the bushmaster tanks? To evacuate Elliott?
13. Under pressure, going down the stairs, the strategies for the tanks to arrive, the fear of the inhabitants, their plea? The tanks, the timing, getting out, the explosion? The dead soldiers in the street, the graphic close-ups of the wounds, then the dragging of the wounded, there screams, the pain, getting them inside?
14. The focus on the details of the care for the two wounded men, morphine, their comments, pain and screams, stoic suffering? Some of the others shellshocked?
15. The relief command, coming in, the leader, competence, decisions to be made, discussions, surveillance, radio?
16. the final evacuation, the timing, the shooting, tanks getting away?
17. The Iraqi snipers coming into the street, standing about, what they had achieved, the Americans driving away? The destroyed house, the suffering of the family?
18. The nature of warfare for those in action and for victims of warfare?

PORCELAIN WAR

Ukraine/US, 2024, 87 minutes, Colour.

Slava Leontyev, Anya Stasenko, Andrey Stefanov.

Directed by Brendan Bellomo, Slava Leontyev.

2024 Oscar nominee for Best Documentary. It can be seen as a companion piece to the 2023 Oscar-winning 20 Days at Mariapul. The setting is the Russian invasion of Ukraine and the fight back.

The film opens with porcelain miniatures, the sculpting the formation of the porcelain, the delicate painting with the small brush to form attractive small pieces. We are introduced to the artist, Anya, working on the porcelain, but also out in nature, with camera, capturing the beauties of flora and fauna in close-up, using them as models for her painting. Her companion is Slava, working with the porcelain, also a photographer. And there is also their friend Andrey.

But, it is 2022, the Russian invasion of Ukraine.

The focus of the film is on art, especially in time of war and resistance. A lot of the commentary focuses on the nature of art, its significance, its transcendence, symbol of humanity, the continued need for art to sustain the human spirit.

As the film continues, with the bombardments in the town of Kharkiv, 25 miles from the Russian border, buildings destroyed, people killed and injured, the artists decide that they must stay and resist. However, there is a great spirit of patriotism, the film showing how ordinary people with ordinary occupations, and including artists, join the resistance and fight back, finding new skills in command and strategies.

Anya Slava decides to make a film, something new for him, but the end result captures the atmosphere of the fight back against the Russians in 2022-2023. Quite a lot of on location photography, the small squads, the leadership, the dangers, the strategies.

And so, the film links the human spirit in resistance during oppression with the human spirit being creative, Anya continuing to make images, giving a symbolic Dragon to a group of soldiers for encouragement in their resistance. And many other examples and discussions about the different parts and the significance in war and transcending war.

And, right throughout the film there is their small dog, Frodo, cheerful spirit in the times.

THE AMATEUR

US, 2025, 123 minutes, Colour.

Rami Malek, Rachel Brosnahan, Jon Bernthal, Holt McCallany, Julianne Nicholson, Caitriona Balfe, Michael Stuhlbarg, Laurence Fishburne.

Directed by James Hawes.

Based on a novel by Newsweek reporter, Robert Littel, The Amateur was first filmed in 1981 with John Savage and Christopher Plummer. It was the era of popular spy novels by Robert Ludlum in one wit suggested that this version of The Amateur is “Bourne Again”! Not exactly, action sequences yes, but the central character here, Charlie Heller, played by Oscar winner Rame Malek (Bohemian Rhapsody as Freddie Mercury) would not necessarily be the first choice for an action hero!

In fact, he plays a highly skilled IT expert, perhaps of the “nerd” variety, at home in his sealed office and IT centre, making contacts, tracking, identifying voices, but also discovering that some of the CIA authorities are conducting illegal black ops.

This is where a film version of CIA action in the 1980s has to give considerable way to a version in the 2020s. The developments of IT, social networking, mobile phones, instant connections, instant surveillance, storage of information.

But, Charlie Heller has a loving relationship with his wife, Sarah, Rachel Brosnahan, her going to a meeting in London and to his shock and horror, grief and obsession, discovering that she has been killed during a robbery, offering herself as a hostage for someone else, being shot.

Acceptance of this reality is not the first response of Charlie Heller. Rather, he becomes obsessed with revenge.

As action films go, Charlie Heller’s determination, going through some rigorous CIA action training, but not very good with the gun, is a driving force in this action. And, as a bonus, the audience is treated to a wide range of location action, London, Paris, Marseille, Istanbul, in Romania, the Baltic coast… And Charlie, not only identifying who the villains are, especially the one who pulled the trigger, but he is able to track them down, them, destroy them.

However, as with so many action films, there is the issue of the plausibility, and then the question of credibility. With the action moving fast, what about realism and practical details of food, rest, toilet breaks, money in the pocket, the functioning or not of IT equipment, travel and air tickets…? Audiences accepting omissions because of the action?

As always, there are some moral questions, complications. The role of the CIA, illegal and secret black ops in the name of patriotism, these agents being held to account, International criminal gangs, ruthless business and murders, and, with Charlie Heller himself, the obsession of revenge, motivations of vengeance, and his setting up killings parallel to the set-ups by the villains. And, with Rami Malek the amateur action hero grieving the death of his wife, rather than an all-conquering beefed-up agent, there is also some emotional challenging.

1. Action level of the 1980s? Updating to the 2020s? The transition to the world of IT and espionage?
2. The international settings, Washington DC, London, Paris, Marseille, Istanbul, Turkish coast, Romania, the Russian coast? And the world of the CIA? The musical score?
3. The realism of the plot? Plausibility? Credibility? Practical details of food, rest, toilet breaks, money, close change, travel and air tickets…? Audiences accepting omissions because of the action?
4. The introduction to Charlie and Sarah, at home, ease with each other, love, his work on the plane, not travelling, her going to London? The contacts, the phone calls? And the various flashbacks during the film?
5. Charlie, going to work, his car, the cards, security, his workplace, computers, programming, espionage, his link with the mysterious corresponded, ears, guessing where he lived? Istanbul? And the later contact, revelation of the truth, the man being dead, his wife continuing the communications, Charlie going to her, her collaboration, his eyes in pursuit of the criminals? That they have covered, the siege, the attack, her death?
6. The robbery in London, the dramatics, on the television news, the details, the Chiefs informing Charlie, his reaction? His being seen as something of a nerd, his help with The bear, summoned by the Chiefs, his hold over them, his information about the illegal ops? There confronting him? The meetings with Chief O’Brien? The later investigations, interrogation of Moore, the lunch with him, their deceiving her?
7. Charlie, obsessed, the motivation, his phone, Internet connections, wanting to be trained, work Henderson, the discussions, shooting practice, Charlie and his limitations? Later Henderson being used, following him in Paris, to Marseille, the confrontations, Istanbul, the fight, his being wounded? And is later reappearing?
8. Charlie and his ability to identify the criminals, the techniques, voices and matches, images? His decision to track them down?
9. Money issues, motivation, the travel to London, information, to Paris, identifying the woman, at the gym, the suffocation, the fight, her escape, it by the van? Charlie and the bus to Marseille?
10. Marseilles, tracking down people, business of Henderson, the bar, getting information?
11. The criminal, the pool, his money, the swimming, Charlie and the confrontation, the dynamics of the pool, the water, the pressure, the interrogation, the threats, the explosion and the deluge?
12. Charlie, in Istanbul, the contacts, the information about Romania, his travel, the setting up of the cargo, the confrontation with the criminal, the threat, the explosives?
13. Information about Russia, the travel to the coast, seeing the criminals, the boat, his being abducted, the interrogation, the criminal giving him the gun, his inability to shoot, the criminal indicating Charlie’s motivations and setting up deaths?
14. The delay, in Finnish waters, the arrests? Charlie vindicated?
15. Washington, Director O’Brien, the arrests of the Chiefs, their illegal ops?
16. Charlie, the car, Henderson reappearing, his going home, flying the plane? Achievement?

DR STRANGELOVE: NATIONAL THEATRE LIVE

UK, 2025, 130 minutes, Colour.

Steve Coogan, Giles Terera, John Hopkins, Oliver Alvin-Wilson, Penny Ashmore, Ben Deery, Richard Dempsey.

Directed by Sean Foley.

Stanley Kubrick’s comic masterpiece, Dr Strangelove: or, How I Stopped Worrying and Learntedto Love the Bomb, was released at the end of January 1964. It was in production during the nuclear crisis, the missiles of October, the 13 days, Kennedy and Kruschev, and Cuba, October 1962. It was more than relevant. It was a satire to disturb the American consciousness, to disturb world audiences. It was based on a novel by satirist, Terry Southern. And the screenplay was cowritten by Kubrick himself with Peter George.

The film had a significant cast, most notably Peter Sellers in three roles, with Sterling Hayden, George C.Scott and a young James Earl Jones in the cast. Many of its sequences are part of cinema memory.

British writer and director, Armand Iannucci, well known for his satires including The Thick of It, and the Death of Stalin, has adapted Kubrick’s screenplay for the stage. It stays very close to the film in characters and dialogue and the situations, indicating how a satire for the 1960s can have a similar relevance in a changed world situation, especially the Trump US and world of 2025.

While Peter Sellers played three roles, the British officer Lionel Mandrake, the American President, Merkin Muffley, and the mad scientist, Dr Strangelove, with a Nazi past, and an uncontrollable arm often compelling him to try a Nazi salute, Audiences will be pleased to know that this is enjoyably included here. (One of the other features of the film was the cowboy pilot, TJ Kong, played by Slim Pickens, ending the film by riding the bomb hurtling towards earth with a rodeo yippee, and Vera Lynn’s song, We’ll Meet Again – and these are included in this production.)

The star of this performance is Steve Coogan, reprising very effectively the three Peter Sellers roles but also adding a fourth role, that of the cowboy pilot, Kong. And he does this within two hours of performance time. And, fascinating to see how the production handles Coogan in the  four roles, sometimes a stand-in actor for him as president with back to the audience, or having mandrake on the other end of a phone, or having Dr Strangelove appear in a video contact with the War Room -and the amazing speed for him to change costumes and wigs.

The staging of the they is expert, the audience watching the change of scenery, General Jack Ripper’s command post, generals gathered with the President in the War Room but, especially, the three pilots in the cockpit of the plane with filmed background of snowy mountain peaks, their flying steadily towards nuclear apocalypse.

But, it is the satirical dialogue, sometimes very witty, sometimes touches of slapstick, all kinds of misunderstandings, caricatures of American military, the touch of sendup of the British officer and his accent and vocabulary, the portrait of the mad general preoccupied with fluoride and bodily essences and the destruction of America, the gung ho anti-Communist military official, the Russian ambassador…

At first, watching the National Theatre Live version of the stage play, it seems artificial. But, gradually, through the skill of the performances and the wit of the dialogue, we are gradually drawn into the black comedy – but, always realising that through the exaggerations, there is more than a glimpse of truth, always a reality check.

DOG MAN

US, 2025, 89 minutes, Colour.

Voices of: Pete Davidson, Lil Rel Howery, Isla Fisher, Billy Boyd, Peter Hastings, Lucas Hopkins Calderon, Ricky Gervais, Stephen Root.

Directed by Peter Hastings.

Since 2016, there have been at least 13, books about Dog Man, written by Dav Pilkey, who also wrote the Captain Underpants series (one of which was filmed).

This is an animation film, with quite a high-powered voice cast, directed by Peter Hastings who also provides the sounds for Dog Man, which is very much geared to a younger audience. With the strange story of Dog Man and his origins, as we watch the film, we will be wondering who is the target audience. A quick enquiry on Google offers some informative help: The series features a half-dog, half-human police officer who fights crime and saves the day in the city. Written in a graphic novel format with comic-style illustrations and speech bubbles, these books are popular with children aged 6-9.

So, there is the answer. Perhaps too much action for the under 6s, perhaps not enough sophistication for the 10s and overs – and, probably a warning that parents and grandparents, unless they are kindly and an demanding, probably will not enjoy the antics so much.

As indicated, the premise seems quite improbable, the officer and his pet dog, Greg, are severely hurt in an accident, the man surviving only by having the transplant of Greg’s head onto his body! He is expected to go into action against the villainous cat, Petey, who wants to eliminate all do-gooders, has his own laboratory and assistant to create menacing machines, but also a little clone cat, Little Petey.

So, a villain, a little cat seeking affection, dog man in action, hounded by the chief of police, and all kinds of chases and mayhem. However, rather a surprise, a cantankerous fish starts to exercise power and menace over all of them (voiced by Ricky Gervais, in villainous English) which leads them to an alliance of Petey  and Dog Man.

So, there we are, possibly for excitable 6 to 9s, probably not so much for the rest of us.

DAFNE

Italy, 2019, 93 minutes, Colour.

Carolina Raspanti, Antonio Piovanelli, Angela Magni.

Directed by Federico Bondi.

Dafne is a small Italian feature film, dedicated to his mother by the director. The title character is a young woman, Down Syndrome, living in the Italian town, with her mother and father, very lively in her manner, not many filters when expressing her opinions, enjoying life.

Then her mother dies suddenly, it has an effect on her, and draws her mother closely to her father. Her father is an older man, often tired, unwell. Dafne and her father have a good relationship even though there is often some sparring.

The action in the later part of the film is Dafne’s decision to visit the tomb of her mother, travelling there on foot, forcing her father to go out, walk and exercise. They encounter relations, torque and bond, visit the tomb, get a lift from sympathetic guards – and the film ends with the closeness of Dafne with her father.

This link indicates 25 films with Down Syndrome characters. https://www.imdb.com/list/ls062258431/

1. The title, Dafne and her story, family, relationship to mother, the mother’s death, her father, age and illness, her life, her job, her friends, Down Syndrome?
2. The setting, the town, the home, the streets and shops, the countryside, the cemetery? The musical score?
3. Audience response to Dafne as a person, empathy with her Down Syndrome?
4. Dafne as a character, her age, straightforward in speech, very few filters? The scenes with her mother, the suddenness of her mother’s death, grief, with her father, the funeral?
5. Dafne with her father, his age, in the house, tired, the to and fro of conversation?
6. Dafne and her friends, at the dance, exuberant dancing, her remarks, her friendship with Viola? Discussions with the boy about the stars? The work at the shop? Her bluntness, comments?
7. Interactions with her father, up and down, his smoking, phoning for the doctor’s appointment, tired, his memories of his wife and the stories, the decision about the place of burial?
8. Dafne wanting to go to her mother’s grave, that they should walk, to get her father out, walking, exercise? The travel, with the aunt and uncle, the car? Her buying the doll, throwing it out the window? The walk, sitting at the grave? The shelter, the rain? The encounter with the guards, friendship, their offering a lift, the happy travelling?
9. Dafne and her father, the bonding, and the film ending?