Displaying items by tag: Peter Malone's Movie Reviews

ROB PEACE

US, 2024, 120 minutes, Colour.

Jay Will, Mary J.Blige, Chiwitel Ejiofor, Camila Cabello, Curt Morlaye, Caleb Eberhardt, Michael Kelly, Mare Winningham, Juan Castano, Benjamin Papac.

Directed by Chiwitel Ejiofor.

An American story about a young man, African-American from the neighbourhoods in New Jersey, strong intelligence, wanting to do good for the world – but, ultimately, doing wrong things for many right reasons.

Rob Peace, 1980-2011, showed talent when he was a little boy, living with his mother and grandparents, separated from his father but relishing visits and outings with him. His father, very affirming of his son, full of encouragement. Then the beginnings of tragedy with his father accused of killing two young women, a long delayed trial giving cause for a later appeal and moments of freedom, his son growing up, loyal to his father but often concerned about his guilt or not.

Interestingly, this film shows some positive aspects of Catholic education in the US during the 1990s, especially at a college run by the Benedictines, St Benedict’s (and a very interesting Wikipedia entry about the history of the school), Rob’s mother wanting him to get the best education. He thrives in the atmosphere, excels in studies and being accepted into Yale.

Rob has the greatest ambitions, love of science, microbiology, hopes to work on cures for cancer. He has a sympathetic roommate, Jeff Hobbs (and Jeff Hobbs actually writing the well-received book about Rob Peace), a supportive girlfriend, the pride of his mother and of his imprisoned father.

But the wrong things for some right reasons – a desire to raise money to help an appeal for his father leads him to take equipment from the science laboratory and manufacture drugs in his father’s abandoned home, friends serving as dealers, making money to pay for lawyers. On the one hand, he runs the risk of being arrested. On the other, he is able to get a teaching job at St Benedict’s and thrives on working with the children in classes and lab work.

Later, wanting to improve the neighbourhood in which he grew up, he collaborates with real estate agents on an ambitious plan but is thwarted by the financial collapse of 2008-2009. And, again, the need for repayments.

Actor Jay Will offers a convincing performance as Rob, the qualities of character, the twists of motivation that led to his downfall.

The film was written and directed by British actor, Chiwitel Ejiofor (who also directed The Boy who Chased the Wind, well worth seeing for its African setting), who also plays the role of the father. Singer Mary J. Blige plays his mother. Michael Kelly is a sympathetic and encouraging priest at St Benedict’s.

An interesting story, good performances, and a cautionary moral tale.

1. The plain title, the focus on Rob, his character, his life, his achievements, failures, short life and death?
2. New Jersey, the 1980s and 90s, the neighbourhood, homes, drug dealing, violence? The contrast with St Benedict’s and its vision for its students? Yale, the world of academia, sharing apartments? The prison sequences, the courts? The drug processing and dealing? The transformation of the neighbourhoods, the financial crash? The musical score, the songs and style of the periods?
3. The book by Jeff Hobbs, his being Rob’s roommate, sharing the experiences, a tribute to Rob?
4. Rob as a little boy, called Shaun, living with his mother, single, hard-working, with his grandparents and their care, the visits from his father, going out with him, the bond with his father, his father’s affirmation? The homeliness of everybody listening to the match on the porch? Rob emerging as clever, good with maths and complexities, his father affirming him as brilliant?
5. The character of his father, separated from his wife, the visitations, making money, the car breaking down, the range of friends, the drug dealing? The gun? The story of the two women being shot? His arrest, the continued question throughout the film of whether he was guilty or not, the identifying of the gun, the question of the police planting the gun? The delays for the trial, found guilty, in prison?
6. Shaun, teenage, his mother wanted him to be called Rob, sending him to private school, St Benedict’s, the tradition of the school, the Benedict and teachers, the character of Father Leahy, the motto of the school, all brothers helping brothers, the various other qualities, Rob’s contribution? His enjoying his time at school, the encouragement of the teachers, his education, graduation, the application for Yale, his being accepted?
7. His visits to his father, the loophole, supporting his father, the hearing, the judge sympathetic, his father freed, going home, the happy times together? The appeal, coming early, the issue of finance, the expenses for lawyers, Rob and his dilemma? Advice? The judge condemning his father, back to jail?
8. Rob, going to jail to visit, sharing the apartment with Jeff? The meeting with Naya, the bond with her, love? His studies, achievement, science, maths, microbiology, healing for cancer…? The support of the professor, her recognising his talent, allowing him to the laboratories? The racial encounter with the student, the Professor siding with Rob? The further encouragement, her seeing that he had taken the equipment, the hearing, her recommendation for his graduation, but not being able to recommend him for further applications?
9. His father, the cancer, Rob and his decisions, gathering his friends, the drug connections in the neighbourhood, taking the equipment, going to the empty house, setting up the lab, the drugs, the sales? Yale security and pursuit? Getting enough money for a lawyer and for the medication for his father?
10. Rob’s mother, time passing, her pride, the issue of her husband, his guilt, indications of his past violence? The grandparents, ageing, illness and deaths?
11. The effect on Rob, the motivations for his choices, risking the law, the security at Yale, the money, throwing it out the window? His graduation?
12. His father’s death, the final visit to him, pleading for him to tell the truth, his father upset? The later meeting with the couple, their being afraid to speak, their information about the gun, the photo of the father with the gun, Rob burying it at the graveside?
13. Rob, going to St Benedict’s, the support of Father Leahy, the discussions, encouragement? His classes and his enjoying teaching? Possibility for research and teaching?
14. His relationship with Naya, her reaction to his decisions, speaking the truth to him, her going to Rio, the phone calls, the prospect of their meeting in California?
15. Rob and his eagerness to change the world for the better, his motivation, the issue of his father’s house, with the real estate agents, with his friends, the money, the loans, the drugs and sales? The financial collapse of 2008-2009?
16. Continuing with the drugs, getting enough money for his friends, the gift for his mother? The courier, being followed, giving the information, the gunmen, shooting Rob?
17. Portrait of a man with the enormous potential, life situations, his decisions, life cut short?

CHRISTMAS KARMA

UK, 2025, 113 minutes, Colour.

Kunal Nayyar, Leo Suter, Charithra Chandran, Pixie Lott, Danny Dyer, Boy George, Rufus Jones, Billal Hasna, Allan Corduner, Billy Porter, Eva Longoria, Hugh Bonneville, Trudie Styler.

Directed by Gurinda Chadha.

The critics who dislike this film complained that it had a week plot! What would Charles Dickens have to say about that!

There have been many, many versions of Charles Dickens popular novel of 1843 A Christmas Carol. And, there have been many variations on the plot, especially with a focus on Scrooge. There have been a number of dramas, there have been musicals, there have been ghost stories…

Gurinda Chadha (Bend it Like Beckham) draws on her Indian cultural background, especially as it has taken root in the United Kingdom, in London. She has chosen to use Dickens’ story and characters, in quite some detail, especially her version of Ebenezer Scrooge, called here Eshaan Sood, the ghosts of Jacob Marley and other Christmases, Bob Cratchit and his family. But they are firmly set in the multi-ethnic, multicultural, communities in and beyond London.

Which means a move from the Christian tradition of Christmas to its being celebrated as a Festival for all cultures, the time of joy, of generosity.

And, the film tries on all kinds of entertainment and movie conventions. First of all, it should be considered as the equivalent of a cinema pantomime, not a straightforward telling of the story, but rather a heightened atmosphere, eccentric characters with exaggerated performances designed to delight and for laughter. And, this version is also a musical drawing on all kinds of music and songs, breakdance, rap, ballads, choral recitals, comic lyrics, and some enjoyment of Bollywood musical styles, and the interweaving of the traditional Christmas songs and carols into the background score. And a reminder of the Christian tradition with a sequence in a church.

With the Scrooge character, played by Kunal Nayaar (popular with his 279 episodes of The Big Bang Theory), a bit younger than usual, but dramatising all of Dickens’ imagining of his meanness, in his company, with his staff celebrating Christmas, no bonuses, exact accounts, even with his assistant, Bob Cratchit (a sympathetic Leo Suter).

The film spends quite a deal of time with the ghosts. According to the credits, Hugh Bonneville is the ghost of his partner, Jacob Marley (though unrecognisable). And the pantomime atmosphere continues in the highly exaggerated presence of the three ghosts, their clothes, their appearances, their mannerisms, Eva Longoria dressed as for the Mexican Day of the Dead for Christmas past, Billy Porter in a very mannered style as Christmas present and, rather briefly compared with the others, Boy George made up as the ghost of Christmas to come.

There are several relatives, his nephew and his wife inviting him to Christmas celebration, and his friends at the shop, their hardships, trying to sell Christmas decorations and gifts.

All the Dickens ingredients are there – and then some, especially Eshaad Sood’s back story of an Indian in Uganda, the Idi Amin era, his coming to England, a poor boy, struggling to make his way, in love, the possibility of happiness in marriage but his fulfilling the expectations of his in-laws to make something of himself, sacrificing everything to build up his fortune, losing his fiancee, devoting himself completely to becoming a millionaire. Ghost of Christmas Present opens Sood’s eyes to the realities of Christmas which he shuns, the Cratchit family and their needs, touching his heart. And the future is grim – his funeral, all alone.

Sood experiences a wonderful conversion, his joy that it is still Christmas morning, and, doing a Warren Buffet with his fortune, distributed to all and sundry, to the charities, to his staff, and, of course, to the Cratchit family and Tiny Tim (who doesn’t get the opportunity to say God bless us all).

The film that Gurinder Chandra is offering to a wide audience who want joy at Christmas, is a happy story, happy songs, comic characters, hard hearts softened. Obviously, this will not appeal to everyone – but it has the potential.

On its release in the UK, several prominent British reviewers offered scathing reviews, one giving it no stars, deriding it as one of the worst Christmas films ever. But, the target audience was not these reviewers, but rather a general public who are open to some light entertainment, even if not perfect, which brings some joy and merriment. (But there is the question concerning these reviewers and why they chose to use such vitriolic language in their condemnatory reviews of what is rather innocent and harmless entertainment.)

1. The popularity of Charles Dickens A Christmas Carol. The many versions? The various imaginings?
2. The London Christmas Carol, but in the multi-ethnic communities? The target audience? Christmas as a Festival celebration rather than emphasising the Christian tradition? Taking the universal “spirit of Christmas”?
3. The work of the director, Indian background, Karma in the title and in the life of Eshaan Sood? Her knowledge of the Indian community in London, UK? Traditions, celebrations, costumes, performance, singing and dancing? Hollywood/Bollywood? The film as a musical, breakdance, rap, choral, ballads, an exuberant Bollywood style?
4. Use of Dickens’ narrative, the Scrooge character, a bit younger than might have been expected, his meanness, demands in his office, a millionaire, complaints about taxes, refusing to help charities, in his office, the staff celebrating Christmas and his putting a damper, the assistance of Bob Cratchit? His being alone, no interest or compassion?
5. The use of Dickens’ ghosts, Jacob Marley, his partner, warning? Christmas past, the costume of the Day of the Dead, personality of the ghost, her singing, commentary, accompanying Sood, the narrative of Uganda, Indians, migrating? The lonely boy, his experiences, hardships, fiancee, in love, meeting her parents, their expectations, his determination to make something of himself, completely dedicated, alienating his fiancee and her leaving, his loneliness, continued work, becoming a millionaire, his company, the narrowness of his life?
6. The presentation of the Cratchit family, husband and wife, the children, Tiny Tim and his weakness, the outing, the joyful songs, Bob singing his ballads?
7. The ghost of Christmas present, Billy Porter and his experience, manner, clothes, hair, commentary, singing? Taking Sood on his tour, to see how the other half lived, the hardships, the sacrifices? Tiny Tim, his illness, touching Sood, his own memories? A conversion experience?
8. The ghost of Christmas to come, Boy George, not a long performance, singing, presence? Sood taken into the future, the coffin, his funeral, people absent, Bob Cratchit in the church and leaving? Loneliness, nothing personal achieved?
9. Waking up, still Christmas morning, the choir, the gifts, their singing, change of clothes, coming down, in the streets, distributing his wealth, the encounters with everyone, going to his nephew’s party and everyone surprised, his reactions and joy? Going to the shop, paying for everything in the shop and the family’s amazement?
10. Going to see Bob Cratchit, the family, Mrs Cratchit suspicious, is one Tim, the gifts, the celebration?
11. Sood and the experience of Christmas spirit, change of heart, generosity and joy, distributing wealth to make others happy, and the postscript of his return to Uganda, seeing his friend after so many years, remembering his past, happiness – and future joy?

IF I HAD LEGS, I'D KICK YOU

US, 2025, 113 minutes, Colour.

Rose Byrne, Delaney Quinn, Mary Bronstein, Conan O'Brien, Christian Slater, A$AP Rocky, Danielle Macdonald, Ivy Wolk, Mark Stolzenberg, Daniel Zolghadri.

Directed by Mary Bronstein.

This disturbing and challenging drama was released at the same time as Die My Love with Jennifer Lawrence. Die My Love dramatised a mother descending into deep depression after the birth of her baby, a film which the female audience could identify with, a film that made demands on the male audience for appreciation and understanding.

This is true of If I Had Legs – only much more so. It is quite emotionally demanding of its audience, often a hard watch but a film which dramatises so much of the pain that a woman, a mother and wife, sometimes has to suffer. And, once again, there would be enormous empathy for a female audience watching this film. And, once again, a challenge to a male audience for appreciation and understanding, to elicit some empathy.

Rose Byrne has had a long career in Australian and international films for over 30 years. Critics are referring to her performance here as Linda, mother of a young daughter needing medical care, her husband away with contact only by phone, herself a therapist but also undergoing her own therapy and not coping at all well, at times not coping at all, as the performance of a lifetime.

For so much of the drama the words frantic and desperate best describe what is happening for Linda, required to give constant attention and presence to her child, seeing her clients for therapy (and another disturbing subplot with a young mother not coping at all and disappearing) and Linda having sessions with her own therapist (played by television’s, Conan O’Brien), proving to be an antagonistic and uncooperative client.

Then, sudden disaster in the apartment, her daughter (not seen throughout the film until the end, but always a presence, always a voice) finding her room filling with water and the discovery of the roof caving in flooding the apartment, the camera returning to the gaping hole in the roof throughout the film. Added pressures, her husband away, the landlord uncooperative, delays in repairs, mother and daughter having to stay in a hotel, sad memories of an early abortion.

Linda’s behaviour becomes more and more erratic, sometimes keeping composure in working with her clients, but even that beginning to disintegrate. She is also required to join a women’s group to help to cope with their daughter’s illness, but Linda is defiant, rude, bluntly outspoken towards the leader as well as some of the distraught mothers in the group. (The leader of this group is played by the writer-director, Mary Bronstein, her screenplay drawing on some of her own experiences.)

While there are some sympathetic characters, especially a neighbour played by rap singer A$ap Rocky, who becomes entangled in Linda’s moods, we see Linda becoming the victim of so many others’ moodiness, her therapist, her clients, the pedantic woman at the store… little miseries to add to the overall misery of Linda’s experience, her love for her daughter, the continued demands and weariness of constant care.

A review of this film should offer an alert that is not just a movie to go to for some entertainment. Rather, it is significant in offering its audience a harrowing experience, some empathy for a suffering woman who is not always sympathetic.                 

1. The title, tone? Expectations? The work of the writer-director, her experiences?
2. An American story and setting, universal characters, themes and issues?
3. The American city, homes and apartments, hospitals, conference rooms, therapists’ rooms, shops, and the final open space and the beach and the sea? The musical score?
4. Audience response to Linda? Rose Byrne’s performance? Age, marriage, her husband in service, away, her daughter, her age (not seen, heard, seen at the end), her illness, the constant care and presence? How sympathetic a person, mother?
5. Linda, the effect of the demands of her daughter’s illness, taking her to school, the demands of the parking attendant and his aggression and her aggressive response, asking others to take her daughter into school? The conversations with the doctor, her presence expected at the discussion sessions with the mothers, her putting off the appointments? Discussions about her daughter’s illness, the treatment, the possibilities of terminating the treatment?
6. The water in the apartment, her daughter’s reaction, the flood in the apartment, the crashing down of the roof? Further exasperation? Mother and daughter having to live in a hotel, the neighbours, Linda going to the store, wanting the alcohol, the assistant and his strictness, Jamie and his sympathetic response, trying to talk to her, her walking away, her surly attitudes towards him, his later help, going to the house, falling through the hole in the roof, injuring himself? Linda and her attitudes?
7. Linda and her therapist, her tantrums and silence, his reactions, the relationship, sympathy, hostility, losing patience, her memories and telling of an early abortion? Then discovering Linda as a therapist, with Caroline, the baby, depression, the absent husband, ringing during the night, coming to the apartment, dependence, disappointment, her disappearance, Linda and the police, the questioning, Caroline’s husband on the phone and his attitude? Caroline reappearing, Linda’s handling of the situation, failing, Caroline running away towards the sea?
8. Linda, her clients, Stephen, dreams and emotions, the young woman waiting?
9. The building, the phone calls, the landlord, reasons for delay, no repairs? Staying in the hotel, Jamie and his mother?
10. The building up of exasperation, the phone calls to her husband, his response, her cutting him off?
11. Linda going to the meeting, surly towards the leader, harsh towards the mother with her story, trying to be blunt and honest? Saying there was no hope, walking out? Going to her daughter, the information about the tube, removing it, the hole healing up?
12. Chris, eventually arriving, his uniform, the repairs in the apartment, his exasperation, her response?
13. Linda, running away, to the beach, into the successive waves, washed up on the beach?
14. Seeing her daughter, her husband’s return, her depression, what future?

THE FIFTH STEP/NATIONAL THEATRE LIVE

UK, 2025, 82 minutes, Colour.

Jack Lowdon, Martin Freem an.

Directed by Finn Den Hertog.

An impressive dramatisation of the play by David Ireland, part of National Theatre Live. The title refers to the 12 steps of the Alcoholics Anonymous program, the Fifth Step, Confession.

The staging: this is theatre in the round or, specifically, a square stage, with the audience on all sides, visible during the whole performance. With only two in the cast, it is important that they move around so that the audience can see the various aspects of the performance, their walking, standing, sitting, removing the props and organising the stage. The running time is comparatively brief but there are several scenes, indicated by lights and the work of the cast in preparing for the next scene. There is a strong musical score.

Background of Alcoholics Anonymous: the reality of alcoholism, an illness, an addiction. The hold on an alcoholics, mental issues, physical, emotional, relationships. And the development of meetings, the AA plan, the 12 steps, the prayer, the religious dimension, God/religion/not.

The process: the sponsor, the choice of the sponsor, meeting with the sponsor and the arrangements, initial wariness, the raising of the gay issue of the sponsor, concern, curiosity about attitudes and behaviour. Luca, his age, experience, lack of experience, curiosity and concern. The contrast with James, his age, experience, his past sponsor, the actual issue, the aftermath and consequences.

Sponsorship: James, no drink for 25 years, the effect, the stories about his own supervisor, his marriage, son? The contrast with Luke and his age and lack of experience? The importance of power as regards the sponsor, the exercise of power, control, interests, decisions.

The portrait of Luca: age, appearance, clothes, manner, work on not, lack of education, long clash with his father, bad memories, the drinker, with his mates? Contemporary culture, sexuality, sexist, his language, focus. The drink and its effect. His myopia about his masturbation, 20 times a day, expectations of work, use of time. James and the recommendation for some religious experience, spiritual experience. The effect on him, able to quote the Scriptures, Old Testament/New Testament, the Jesus language, revivalist language. His genuine response, the issue of the woman at the church, married, the relationship, awkwardness, his response to James’s reaction about religion. Time passing, Luca not drinking, somebody reporting him as a drinking, but non-alcoholic, Luca adapting. Final crisis with James, the issue about the married woman, James talking as if the possibility was his own wife, the consequences for Luca, not wanting James as sponsor, and arriving and experiencing the step of Confession and the question of what would follow.

The ported James: his age, 25 years not drinking, his marriage, his son, has a best friend, not telling him about alcoholism, the background of his own sponsor, the gay man and the aftermath. The years of marriage, the issue of how strong the relationship with his wife, his son moving away from home. His attitude towards religion, saying he was a recovering Catholic, hostile to religion, but speaking of spiritual experiences, references to Buddhism, slights on Christianity. The issue of his being Luca sponsor, responsibility, power, his agenda. The melodrama of his suspicions about the woman and Luka’s relationship, as regards his own marriage and wife. Luca refusing him as sponsor and the effect on his emotions, future.

Effect for the audience of watching the stage play, a filmed version, the performance, the focus on the dialogue and words, the focus on action and the characters and performance. The involvement of the audience with the characters and the issues observing, emotional involvement.

4 DAYS

Philippines, 2016, 75 minutes, Colour.

Sebastian Castro, Mikoy Morales, Stephanie Sol..

Directed by Adolfo Alix, Jr.

The four days of the title include Valentine’s Day, four days in a relationship between two friends at a university campus.

The theme of this story is relationships, relationship between two men, two friends, one with a string of girlfriends, the other a musician, but indicating a gay attraction with his friend.

Many significant Filipino directors have taken on gay themes in their films, often quite explicit. This film is exactly the opposite. And, the filmmakers, a collaboration between the director and the actor portraying the friend, Mikoy Morales, have opted for what one might call a more contemplative of approach.

For their aesthetic, many of the takes are for a very long, the camera staying on the characters, individuals, the couple, and background shots of the campus, overhead shots, rooms with computers… Audience who prefer things to be moving, they may find these long shots irritating or, perhaps, intolerabley long, even superfluous.

The film introduces the two characters and their situation. One of the friends has a girlfriend, declaring that this is the real thing and the other demanding that it be a full commitment because of his friendship with the young woman. He composes a song for Valentine’s Day, sings it.

However, the seemingly straight young man is shown then in a very long shot, lying on his bed, weeping. Then the approach of his friend and the suggestion of some activity but, the opposite of the older films, the camera cutting away, leaving the implications of behaviour suggested.

There is some movement and speed towards the end with the confrontation between the two, the gay man becoming more and more desperate, wanting some kind of acknowledgement, the other man wanting more time.

And that is it, for the audience to reflect rather than to see, to ponder the issue more than to be emotionally involved.

BEING EDDIE

US, 2025, 103 minutes, Colour.

Eddie Murphy.

Directed by Angus Wall.

Life and career of Eddie Murphy. The framework for this film is a contioused interview with Eddie Murphy himself at the age of 64, looking back at his family, the relationship with his father, his father leaving home but his media background, his relationship with his mother, her second marriage and his stepfather, a true father figure. And a great attachment to his older brother, Charlie, who is interviewed during the film paying tribute to his brother, acting as security guard in later years.

In the later part of the film there is a focus on movie with his 10 children.

Despite his talent being “out there”, it emerges that Eddie Murphy is rather introverted, stepping back in real life, not smoking or drinking, with a basic religious and spiritual sense, confident in himself, realising he has a wide talent for impersonations, stand-up comedy, film comedy, film drama and has fulfilled all those ambitions.

Certainly one of the most attractive features of this documentary is the huge list of actors and comedians, directors, who offer their observations and comments, affirmations of Eddie Murphy. They include: Dave Chappelle, Arsenio Hall, Tracy Morgan, Chris Rock, Jamie Foxx, Kevin Hart, Pete Davidson, Jeffrey Katzenberg, Jerry Bruckheimer, John Landis.

The film also traces the line of Murphy’s appearances, ambitions as a teenager, huge admiration for Richard Pryor, breaking through on Saturday Night Live before he was 20, his film appearances, especially 48 hours, the fact that an African-American could be a partner to a white star, then Trading Places and references to his films during the 1980s including Coming to America, and his directing Harlem Nights.

There are various collages of his impersonations, especially the Jewish man, and the wide variety of the family in The Nutty Professor.

The film also traces some ups and downs, his Oscar nomination for Dreamgirls and his comments about not winning, his speech at the Oscars in 1989 making an award and its not being reported in the media, the number of comedies in the 2000s not quite successful.

Then there was his return to Saturday Night Live, the gathering of the stars, the footage from the preparation for the segments, the interactions with the personnel, and then the performance and the response.

Eddie Murphy has continued to entertain, also recorded songs, a number of films for cinemas and television, even up to the time of filming this documentary, 2025.

During the film there is mention that in the 1980s, Michael Jackson, Prince, Whitney Houston and Eddie Murphy emerged changing the perception of African-Americans in media, not just music, but in personalities, performances, stand-up comedy, films. They broke through any barriers for those who follow them.

THE CHORAL

UK, 2025, 114 minutes, Colour.

Ralph Fiennes, Roger Allam, Mark Addy, Alun Armstrong, Ron Cook, Simon Russell Beale, Jacob Gudman, Emily Fairn, Taylor Uttley,

Directed by Nicholas Hytner.

There have been many perspectives on World War I and inspect on Britain, on young men and conscription. This is definitely to the fore in this film. But, the focus is on music, the choral.

This is the fictional town of Ramsden, like many Yorkshire towns, recreated in quite some detail, the vast mills which dominate everyone, the streets, the lanes, the houses, the pubs, the Grand Hotel, the railway station and the surrounding hilly countryside. The film immerses us in Ramsden.

And there is a wide range of characters, so many that, at times, the audience might lose touch with who’s who, suggestions of character but leaving it to the audience to fill in. There is the postman with a sad letters knocking on doors and the grieving mothers and wives, and his cheeky young offsider who sees grief as an opportunity for making come kind of sexual advance. There is Mary, the young Salvation Army singer, member of a black family. There is Bella, her boyfriend at war, missing, her taking up with someone else. There are the rather haughty ladies, the contraltos of the choir, snobbish. There is Mrs Bishop whose ordinary home serves as a brothel.

But, the focus is on the choral, the committee led by the mill owner, aided by the photographers and the vicar – characteristically good performances from veterans Roger Allam, Alun Armstrong, Mark Addy, Ron Cook. The choir master in lists.

The proposal for the new choirmaster is Mr Guthrie, talented conductor, living a lot of time in Germany, under suspicion for this, and the quiet indication that he might be homosexual. He is played by Ralph Fiennes, another excellent performance.

So a great deal of the film focuses on the motley choir, the recruiting of any of the young men around the town willing to sing, the auditions, serious and comic, music from popular songs to Gilbert and Sullivan, arias. The intention is Bach’s St Matthew’s Passion but the suggestion by Mr Guthrie of Edward Elgar’s oratorio, The Dream of Gerontius, from the poem by Cardinal Newman (and some anti-Catholic bigotry expressed).

A lot of rehearsal sequences, the return of Bella’s boyfriend, Clyde, Jacob Dudman, despite an arm lost, disappointment with Bella, Mr Guthrie persuading him that his sadness can be the basis for developing his gift and his being offered the role of Gerontius. Some fine scenes where Mr Guthrie talks intensely with Clyde about his fate, and a speech by Clyde indicating that purgatory exists, and that it was there in the no man’s land between the trenches.

An episode with Elgar himself, a jaunty Simon Russell Beale, agreeable, then taken aback by the plans for the interpretation of his oratorio.

Perhaps it’s the old story of putting on a show, but, ultimately, it is a moving success. But, then more reality, conscription, young men reaching that age, and the farewell at Ramsden Station.

It would be hoped that the film would encourage those who like to sing to join a choir – but, there is something strange about seeing the jaunty young men of that period singing serious music, not dreaming that rock and roll and heavy metal were to come and take over. The screenplay was written by celebrated playwright, Alan Bennett, in his late 80s.

1. Expectations, music, the Yorkshire town, World War I, conscription, battle and deaths?
2. The Yorkshire setting, the town of Ramsden, the detail of the town, streets, lanes, homes, shops, pub, the hotel, the Hall, the surrounding countryside, the Hills?
3. The importance of music, the wide range, the Dream of capturing tears, Bach and St Matthew’s Passion, popular songs of the period, Gilbert and Sullivan, late 19^th century and early 20^th century music?
4. The background of the war, 1916, the young men called up, the postman delivering the letters, the grieving wives and mothers? The issue of conscription, the young men reaching the age to go to war, the diminishing number of young men?
5. The factories and mills, the dependence on the mills, Duxbury and his owning the mills, his position with the choral, his associates, the photographer and the photos of the young men, his associate, the vicar, the committee for the Choral, the range of auditions, good and bad, the boys urged to go including the postman and his friend, the women, the contraltos and their snobbery, the pianist and his going to war, motives, photo? The need for the choirmaster?
6. Suggestion of Mr Guthrie, reactions, living in Germany, success in Germany, indications quietly of his homosexuality? His return because of the war, the music of the Grand Hotel, the approach, the discussions, his quoting Goethe, their wanting him to be quiet about Germany? Bach as German, the other composers, his having met Brahms? His agreement?
7. Meeting the choir, the new auditions, his reactions, Duxbury and his love of singing? The other men? Mary, black, Salvation Army, earnest, her voice? Bella, the popular songs, but part of the choir? The need for men, going around the town, the pub, eyeing of the girls, the man from the pastry shop?
8. The practice, the discussions, the characters of the various members of the choir, the boys, age, no school because of lack of teachers, issues of sex, girlfriends, sex talk, insensitive? The range of the girls, Bella and the boys, her reticent friend, Mary? The older women, snobbish? Mrs Bishop, her house being a brothel? Duxbury’s visit?
9. The discussions about Bach, the suggestion of Elgar, the story of The Dream of Gerontius, Cardinal Newman and anti-Catholic prejudice? Guthrie and his letter to Elgar? The return acceptance? Elgar and his doctorate at Manchester, Mary and the invitation?
10. War spirit, the choir and the news of the victory, singing God save the King, Guthrie quiet, the death of German friends?
11. Robert, accompanist, devotion to Guthrie, hit critique of him? Piano, support? The call up, his decision to be conscientious objector, Guthrie’s arguments, for the sake of the choir, the hearing, the jingoistic woman, the presumptuous canon knowing God’s mind about war, stiff military man and his contempt of Robert’s motivations?, Duxbury and his trying to mediate? Guthrie present, his argument, the extension because of the concert?
12. Bella, Ellis and the flirtation, her memories of Clyde, his return, loss of his arm, going to meet her, his disappointment? Leaving her free? Sitting on Hill, his sexual request, her acquiescence motivation? His grief? Love of singing, the audition, Guthrie’s response, Duxbury as Gerontius, buildup to it, Clyde stepping in, Mary as the Angel? The limitations of the choir, no orchestra that the three-piece group, the change of perspective, younger Gerontius, the war situation?
13. Conscription, the young men going to be examined, the man from the bakery and epilepsy? The others preparing to go? Feeling that they had not lived? Sexual experience? The young man attracted to Mary, encouraged by her enthusiastic mother, the time alone, the proposal, Mary’s reaction, his stripping, her turning away, her loneliness? The postman going to Mrs Bishop, the sexual encounter, the formalities, no payment?
14. The arrival of Elgar, the academic down, his initial enthusiasm, Mary singing, discovery that Clyde was Gerontius, looking at the score, his upset, the tantrum, offering Mary a tutor? Leaving in a huff? The discussions, the suggestion of no payment so it would be an amateur performance, no fees for Elgar?
15. Letting everyone know, the audience gathering, the strength of the performance, the World War I setting, Gerontius wounded and dying, Clyde and his explanation about purgatory against the Vicar’s Anglicanism, the powerful explanation that than no man’s land was a purgatory for survival? And the background of Guthrie’s talk with Clyde agreeing that he was at his lowest, but that it was the time to sing, to make the most of it?
16. The success of the performance, everybody happy? The applause? Duxbury and his reclusive wife? Her response and reconciliation?
17. The young men going off on the train, the farewell at the station, Robert being taken in by the military as conscientious objector? Guthrie and his achievement?
18. A perspective on Britain and World War I, the small Yorkshire town, the young men, the war across the channel, wounds and deaths, return?

BLACK PHONE 2

US, 2025, 114 minutes, Colour.

Mason Thames, Madalyn McGraw, Ethan Hawke, Jeremy Davies, James Ransone, Miguel Mora, Ariana Rivas, Demian Bichir.

Directed by Scott Derrickson.

In 2022, Black Phone was a very successful menace and horror film. It had strong credentials, basic story from Joe Hill (who, in fact, is the son of Stephen King), director, Scott Derrickson (whose films include The Exorcism of Emily Rose, the two Sinister films, Deliver us from Evil), and a new masked villain played by Ethan Hawke, The Grabber.

Many menacing sequences with the young Finney, played by Mason Thames (who was to go on to star in How to Train a Dragon, Regretting You) vanquishing The Grabber.

Hill and Derrickson have combined for this sequel, bringing The Grabber to life beyond the grave, going back to the original situation at the summer camp with the killing of three children by The Grabber, involving Finney’s mother. And the sequel starts with a prologue back in 1957 with Hope, the mother. But the main action takes place four years after Finney’s destroying of The Grabber.

This time it is Finney’s younger sister, Gwen, Madalyn McGraw, who answers the phone, has relentlessly upsetting dreams, the family having to rescue her to wake her from her restless sleep. And, it is The Grabber on the phone, still menacing, tormenting Gwen.

The main part of the drama is to return to the scene of the crimes, the summer camp, the cooperation with the manager, Armando (Demian Bichir) was there at the time of the killings. Now Gwen has even more fearful dreams, with the group at the camp, Finney, Gwen’s friend, Ernesto, and the father, Terrence, Jeremy Davies, also arriving.

The search takes the group to the lakes, now frozen, and some menacing confrontations, on the ice, and under the ice, The Grabber targeting Gwen, but the group hoping that when they find the bodies of The Grabber’s former victims, there will be some kind of ending.

This sequel has been successful with the public, sympathetic victims who conquer, and The Grabber is installed in the Gallery of successful movie horror villains.

But, we leave the cinema with a smile rather than with any dread.

1. The impact of the original film? Horror, menace, victims, survival and confrontation, monster, background story, attacks, death? Expectations for the sequel?
2. The continuity from the first film, the return of writers, director, cast members? The return of The Grabber?
3. The prologue, 1957, Hope, at the camp, phone, the call, reality and dreams, the boys, carving their names in ice, the end of the call? Hope as the mother of Finney and Gwen? Her death considered suicide, the effect on her husband?
4. 1983, the family, Finney and the experience with The Grabber, killing him? Finney’s four years, depression, drugs? Gwen, her age, memories of the past? Their father, distance, drugs?
5. Gwen, her dreams, phone, The Grabber, the dead children? Talking to her mother on the phone? The overwhelming effect? With Finney, with her father? Her decision to go to the camp? Persuading Ernesto, brother of the dead Robin? Persuading Finney? Travel, snowed in, the manager and his niece, the two on the staff? Trying to understand Gwen’s dreams?
6. The experiences at the camp, Armando remembering Hope, the photos, identifying Wild Bill Hickok as The Grabber? The deaths of the children? Gwen and the continued dreams, the group trying to wake her, understand what was happening?
7. The reappearance of The Grabber, beyond death, his appearance’s tied to the mysterious deaths and the disappearance of the boys’ bodies? Armando and his search, the realisation about the lake, the scene for hockey and games, the probable location, the various searches, the ice, breaking, under the ice, finding the bodies?
8. Gwen’s continued dreams, the presence of her mother, The Grabber and his taunts, explanations of the past, the boys, his killing Hope? The effect on Gwen, the other is trying to wake her, the consequences?
9. The arrival of Terrance, telling him the truth, the impact, when challenging him about his drugs and withdrawal?
10. The decision to search, everyone together, going to the lake, The Grabber, the struggles, finding the remains of the children, the confrontation and the destruction of The Grabber?
11. The ending with a sense of peace, Gwen as normal, the reconciliation of the family, the mystery solved about the boys, and the final phone call, Hope, and a greeting from heaven?

FRANKENSTEIN

US, 2025, 150 minutes, Colour.

Oscar Isaac, Jacob Elordi, Christophe Waltz, Mia Goth, Felix Kammerer, Charles Dance, David Bradley, Lars Mikkelson, Christian Convery, Burn Gorman, Ralph Ineson.

Directed by Gullermo del Toro.

Mexican director, Guillermo del Toro, has had a long fascination with imagination and fantasy, the celebrated Pan’s Labyrinth, and popular action with Blade, Hellboy, Pinocchio. So, what will he choose to do with Frankenstein?

This is very much an all stops out interpretation of Mary Shelley’s classic novel, its narrative, its characters, its explorations of themes of life and death, human arrogance, playing God, playing the devil. Since Boris Karloff played the creature in the 1930s, there have been very many Frankenstein films, and Hammer Studios thrillers, Kenneth Branagh’s 1994 spectacle…

Here is an epic treatment, the Gothic traditions, running for 2 ½ hours.

The familiar elements are all here, the opening in the Arctic with Frankenstein and the monster stranded, the rescue, Victor Frankenstein narrating his story wanting some kind of healing and forgiveness, the background of the Frankenstein family, demanding father, Victor and his scientific interest, experiments with reviving some kind of life, his laboratory, hunting the dead bodies, the creation of the creature, the lightning, the aftermath, the wandering creature and the confrontation with its maker. And all presented with heightened atmosphere.

In all the treatments, the question is how sympathetic Victor Frankenstein should be. Oscar Isaac here is not sympathetic at all – oppressed by his demanding father (Charles Dance), relying for help on his younger brother, William (Felix Kamerer all) and the link with Elizabeth (Mia Goth) and her tender affection for the Creature. There is an interesting new character, the wealthy man, Harlander, Elizabeth’s uncle, who wants to bankroll Frankenstein and his experiments with some sinister intentions, played with his usual relish by Christophe Waltz.

But, significant in this film is that the Creature, not called monster, though made up of many body parts, neatly put together, is, for the most part, the most sympathetic character. And Jacob Elordi plays him with a great deal of pathos, but with dignity, gradually coming to consciousness, words, ideas, out in the countryside learning compassion, to read, but also discover the truth about his origins and that he was doomed not to die.

This is a film which gives great attention to atmosphere, sets and decor, costumes, atmospheric score, enabling audiences to appreciate why the Frankenstein story has continued to be entertaining but much more, a questioning of human power, human arrogance, and the need for forgiveness.

1. Lasting popularity of the story, Mary Shelley’s novel and treatment, issues of life, creativity, death, playing God, playing the devil? The many versions, from the 1930s, Hammer Studios, Kenneth Branagh, 1994, the cinema tradition?
2. The lavish treatment, sets and decor, costumes, atmosphere? Atmospheric score? The Arctic sequences in the snow and ice, the University sequences, the laboratories, the castles, 19^th-century society? The countryside sequences, bleak, wolves, winter?
3. The opening in the Arctic, the presence of Frankenstein and the Creature, the ship, the expedition, the Capt, the crew, the confrontation with the Creature, saving Frankenstein, the threats from the Creature, Frankenstein telling his story, his confession, his fate?
4. The introduction to the Creature, initial horror, strength, menace, threat to Frankenstein, the interaction with the sailors, violence, deaths?
5. Frankenstein telling his story, his background, the sequences with his father, his father’s demands on the cruelty? Treatment of his wife? The birth of his brother? The two brothers grow growing up? The father, the doctor, unable to save his wife, his demands on Victor, testing him as regards medicine, science? His death?
6. Victor, relationship with his brother, growing up, his brother’s life, Elizabeth, her relationship with William? Her visits? Her family background? Expectations? Harlander and Elizabeth as his niece?
7. Victor, his experiments, his machines, theories, the skeletons, the body parts, his demonstration to the professors in Edinburgh, electric charge, movement and life? Then denouncing him?
8. Harlander and his ambitions, personality, state of health, finance, collaboration with Victor, finding the Castle and location? William and his helping his brother build up the laboratory in the Castle?
9. Victor, access to bodies, the executioner, the choices, the background of war, injuries, examining the bodies, transporting them to the Castle, the various limbs? Putting them together, sewing, a composite Creature rather than a monster?
10. The pressure from Harlander, the confrontation with him, syphilis, wanting to be transferred into the creature, Victor not wanting him because of contamination for his brain, his falling to his death? Concealing his body?
11. The storm, the lightning, the drama of his setting up the situation, the Creature, lightning, the movement, coming to life?
12. The nature of the creature, tall, presentable, clothing and cloak, able to say only Victor, the humanity, the inhumanity?
13. Victor’s reaction, amazed, fearful, presumptuous, the treatment of the Creature, imprisoning him? The effect on Victor’s consciousness, conscience? More than he expected? Not anticipating the consequences?
14. The effect on the creature, lonely, exploring the Castle, the relationship with Victor? His ability to heal quickly?
15. Elizabeth, her visit, the discovery of the Creature, the bonding, talking, his saying her name? Her response to Victor?
16. Victor and his impatience with the creature, lack of development, explaining Harlander’s death to William, the decision to set fire to the Castle, the elaborate preparations, setting the fire, the creatures call, Victor’s change of heart, entering, the explosion, breaking his leg?
17. The creature surviving, wandering the countryside, the wolves, the community, his hiding, surviving, the family and their life, hunting the walls, leaving the old blind man, the Creature, listening, understanding, sympathy for the old man, hearing the family’s needs, building, chopping the wood, all kinds of service? The happy life and friendship? The family thinking him the Spirit of the Forest? The old man to Jim to read, speak, think, reflect? Growing understanding? The walls, the return of the family, the Creature fleeing?
18. The decision to find Victor, the return to the Castle, the notes, reading them, knowing that he would live for eternity, getting Victor’s address, travelling to Vienna, the buildup to the confrontation, Victor regretting creating him? The Creature wanting a companion? The celebration, society, lavish? Elizabeth, shielding the Creature from the shot, William dying, fearing his brother, the Creature helping Elizabeth that she dies?
19. The situation in the Arctic, the response of the captain, encouraging Victor to tell his story, sympathy and understanding, the help of the doctors, the creature coming on board, the explanations, Victor’s repentance, the Creature for giving him? The response of the crew? The captain changing his ambition to reach the North Pole and to return home, the response of the crew?
20. The Creature pushing the ship out of the ice, and looking towards the sun, reaching out and beginning his life without death?

CARRY ON CLEO

UK, 1964, 90 minutes, Colour.

Sid James, Kenneth Connor, Kenneth Williams, Joan Sims, Jim Dale, Charles Hawtrey, Amanda Barrie, Victor Maddern, Julie Stevens, Sheila Hancock, Jon Pertwee, Frances DeWolff, Warren Mitchell.

Directed by Gerald Thomas.

The late 1950s to the 1980s, the Carry On… franchise was extraordinarily popular

 Most of the films were produced by Peter Rogers and directed by Gerald Thomas – and a few other films during this period, not Carry on comedies, but British comedies for the wide audience. The rite of this film was Talbot Roth will who began writing comedy sketches as a prisoner of war and putting on reviews, satirical touches, wordplay, Devil traditions, and risk a. He would continue to write many more of the Carry on comedies.

Many audiences, Carry on Cleo is one of the best. It has rather lavish sets and costumes – some noting that they were leftovers from production preparation for Cleopatra, with Elizabeth Taylor and Richard Burton. In fact, this film came out the year after Cleopatra’s release, Amanda Barrie made to look like a variation on Elizabeth Taylor, some parody of the extravagant film, the bath with asses milk, and the rolling of Cleopatra out of the carpet – but, this time, with accidental crash results.

The film relies on audience appreciation of historical spectacles, the early sequences of Caesar trying to conquer Britain and the rather primitive Britain’s and their way of life, the attack, many of them going as prisoners to Rome as slaves – with the slave market sequence and Warren Mitchell representing the slave company, Marcus and Spence serious!

One of the advantages of the Carry on films was the constant cast (though Hattie Jacques is missing from this film). Sid James is just himself as Marc Anthony, Tony to his friends, with Kenneth Williams is a most unlikely Julius Caesar. Kenneth, is one of the captured British, based on the tales of An guest and Horse, Connor, by accident a hero and promoted to Caesar’s guard. (, Relies on his ability to do all kinds of impersonations, especially effective in Watch Your Stern.) Jim Dale is a pleasant leader of the slaves.

There are all kinds of puns, some of them very obvious with the audience waiting for them to be pronounced, quite a lot of innuendo. One of the most famous and everybody comments on it, so also here, Kenneth Williams Caesar about to be assassinated, “infamy, infamy, they have all got it in for me”. And there is a running joke of everybody adding countrymen to Caesar’s exasperation when he starts off “friends, Romans…”. In the final corny joke at his death, playing on the Latin, I came, I saw, I conked out.

Which means then that while this could be considered as lowbrow comedy (and many did), it entertains the lowbrow in all of us.