Kinds of kindness

 

This film is set within a series of reference frames that are different to the ones within which I usually choose to operate, emotionally, psychologically, morally and intellectually. To be honest I really struggled with this film. I stuck it out until the beginning of the third tryptic and then I had to walk.

Without doubt this film is very clever and is as much about the vector of storytelling as it is the story that is told. Maybe it was simply beyond my intellectual grasp. The fact that it carries an 18 certification for violent and extended sexual activity but makes no mention of the physical and psychological violence that is a constant feature of the film, assumes a level of normal that I am not prepared to collude with.

The film is billed as a black comedy. I found nothing remotely comedic in it at all. In the first tryptic I found the portrayal of the need to be controlled and the need to control very disturbing. In the second tryptic the lack of sympathy for the husband was disappointing but as the story develops his behaviour becomes increasingly psychotic although there is always a sense that he is the only one seeing the true reality.

Perhaps I should have stuck it out and maybe the third tryptic unlocks a clear sense of meaning. However I didn't and what I'm left with is a dark exploration of the human need to control others and the human need to gain and express greater self-confidence. It is also about our innate need to be liked and the fear of rejection. Where the kindnesses came in depends on how you define being kind. I found no kindness that I recognised save perhaps in the self-sacrifice of Liz the wife in the second tryptic. There was no facility for saying so far but no further. Everything was always taken to the fullest extreme and perhaps in doing so reveals a side of human potential behaviour that scares me.

The acting performances are very strong. The same troupe playing different characters in the three related tryptics. Emma Stone, Jesse Plemons, Margaret Qualley, Willem Dafoe, Hong Chau, Mamoudou Athie and Joe Alwyn reappear and deliver very convincing character studies - Plemons picking up best actor at Cannes where it premiered.

I would only advise seeing this if you have three hours to waste and are so thick-skinned that everything that has the potential to wound you simply bounces off. I'm sure it's top class cinema for those who have eyes to see but for me I'm happy I didn't have bad dreams after having seen it. I'll give it 3/10.

One Life

 

This is an important story that needs to be told as some parts of humanity seem to be unable to stop repeating the errors of past generations. The story is about a 29 year-old English stockbroker, Nicky Winton played by Johnny Flynn and also Anthony Hopkins as a 79 year-old Winton. The film flicks between 1938 and 1978. Winton was the son of German-Jewish parents who fled Germany because of rising anti-Jewish sentiments and settled in London. 

Hearing of the plight of refugees and Jews fleeing the advancing Nazis, Winton travels to Prague in Czechoslovakia to see for himself. Winton is so gripped by the desperate plight of the people that he formulates a plan to rescue as many of the children as he can. The children will travel by train with visas to enter Britain and be placed with foster families until they can return home. With bureaucratic hurdles and no resources other than determination, it seems an impossible task.

Winton works through the offices of the British Committee for Refugees from Czechoslovakia who put him in touch with a Prague Rabi who has a list of the most vulnerable and at risk Jewish children attached to his synagogue. Slowly Winton earns the trust of the people and sets about gathering information to enable visa applications to be made. Meanwhile his mother Babette (Helena Bonham Carter) is tasked with tackling the government department processing visa applications which of course with war imminent, is overrun with applicants.

Fifty years on and Winton's house is filled with archive boxes full of photos and papers from the operation which successfully ran eight trains from Prague to London and rescued 669 children whose fate otherwise would certainly have been transportation to Nazi concentration camps. In the bottom drawer of his desk is a briefcase which he at first is unable to even touch, let alone 'deal with' as his wife Greta (Lena Olin) constantly urges him to do. Greta goes away to visit their daughter who is about to produce the first grandchild and this acts a catalyst for Winton to burn all the archive boxes and eventually reveal what is in the briefcase.

I won't spoil anything of how the story unfolds and flicks between the two time periods. This is a compelling story, well told with very good performances especially from Hopkins and  Bonham Carter. Tissues will be needed. For me, the irony of the story is being played out on our TV screens with coverage of the current conflict in Gaza. It is not inconceivable that some of those rescued by Winton could be the grandparents of IDF soldiers currently attacking Palestinian families with children in Rafa. Will we never learn? As a film i'll give it 9/10 - well worth seeing.

Dune 2

 

A saviour who was prophesied, who seemingly dies, then is resurrected and leads the people to paradise - sounds familiar to me. Dune Messiah is of course the next book in Herbert's series and never was the ending of a film left so open as to invite a follow up. Whether it be Herbert's Dune or Asimov's Foundation, organised religion is put under the spotlight and with some Hollywood magic makes the leap to Science Fiction. Perhaps an imagined future feels easier to deal with than an historical past?

Director Denis Villeneuve's barnstorming sequel which he describes as an "epic war movie", is the all-action counterpoint to the first film's more contemplative feel. The relentless nature of the combat scenes reminded me of Lord of the Rings but this time on a beach. If you like fighting on a grand scale, this will sate your appetite. I appreciate that Villeneuve was creating an epic, but did it really need to be 2:45 long? For me passages dragged and the narrative arc was constructed so slowly it was painful as the outcome was never in jeopardy.

The whole film is visually stunning and I imagine the IMAX rendition would be something special. The soundtrack is excellent as it never intrudes but always supports. The acting is powerful with Timothée Chalamet carrying off Paul Muad'Dib Atreides with aplomb and strong performances from Zendaya as Chani, Rebecca Ferguson as Paul's mother Lady Jessica, Javier Bardem as Stilgar, Josh Brolin as Gurney Halleck and Austin Butler as the terrifying psychopath Feyd-Rautha.

The Bene Gesserit Sisterhood are a manipulative order whose goal is to breed the Kwisatz Haderach - a male Bene Gesserit with mental powers that bridge space and time and who would be the saviour of the universe. They have been working on this for millennia by controlling bloodlines through seduction and coercive marriages - always working indirectly, never seeking to rule themselves.

The dark and deceptive Bene Gesserit and the brutally violent leaders of the House of Harkonnen are the balance to Paul Atreides and Chani - even if Atreides is driven by revenge. The original book - which my better half says is is much better than the films - was written in 1965 at the height of the Cold War, so it is no surprise that the ultimate deterrent in this film is the threat of unleashing nuclear weapons.

This film left me with conflicting feelings. Whilst it is a visual feast with very good acting and special effects, the relentless fighting, plotting, at times muddy dialogue and slow plot development detracted from the enjoyment for me. I have to say that I was disappointed and didn't enjoy it as much as Dune 1 and can only award it 6/10.

Chocolat

 

Although I have watched this film many times and have used it as a film to invite theological reflection, it has not yet appeared on this blog! Time to rectify that. I watched it earlier this week with a group of friends from church and I have to say it still holds its own.

Set in a rural community in South West France in 1959, with the aftermath of both world wars continuing to be a lived reality for some of the villagers, this film explores the choices people make about the way they live their life, how they respond to the pressure to conform and the positive power of transformation.

With a strong ensemble cast and five Oscar nominations this film, which was released in 2000, begins on the eve of Lent in a community that almost uniformly does what is expected, most of which is anchored by regular church attendance where Count Reynaud (Alfred Molina) who is also the mayor, welcomes townsfolk to each service. He then takes the seat of honour at the front where he can exert his control on the new young priest who has already had his sermon heavily modified by the Count. 

The Count represents a rigid, harsh and controlling way of following religion in a world where there is only black and white. A statue of the First Count stands looking over the village square outside the church - the Count who expelled protestant Huguenots from the village centuries earlier. All of this presents a less than attractive image of the Catholic Church - but I could think of some churches of other traditions that present an equally uninviting image of the God they worship!

The Count, who is a student of history and is predisposed to maintain inherited values and customs, presents a sad figure who carries the weight of the responsibility of being leader of the community as well as the loss of his wife. His wife is on an "extended Italian tour" but it is clear that she will not be returning. The Count surrounds himself with photographs of her and with crucifixes to bring consolation. All of this makes the Count lacking in joie-de-vivre as he constantly reminds villagers of the behaviour the Church expects of them.

As winter gives way to spring so a strong North wind blows and against the grey of the dull village, Vianne (Juliette Binoche) and her daughter Anouk (Victoire Thivisol), robed in red caped cloaks battle the elements to find lodging and shop they can run. The colourful cloaks strike a strong contrast with the village, a contrast that is to become disruptive and ultimately transformative in a good way.

Vianne, who is half Mayan, is an itinerant evangelist - her Gospel of choice being Chocolate - especially when combined with chilli in ancient Mayan recipes. Chocolate proves to be more than a sexual aphrodisiac as it eventually has the power to re-enliven and re-energise the entire community.

The battle between life-sapping Church and the overbearing Count and Vianne's life-gving chocolate continues throughout the six weeks of Lent. The narrative is punctuated by individual battles of temptation when faced with chocolate, the illness of Vianne's Landlady (Judy Dench) and also the arrival of Irish Romanies, led by Roux (Jonny Depp) who drift in on the river by boat. With each piece or cup of chocolate, Vianne dispenses Choco-wisdom that challenges the dull status quo and which invites people to become a technicolour version of themselves as the true person they were created to be. This is a feel-good film that is life affirming.

On the eve of Easter, the Count sees Caroline (Carry-Ann Moss), his young widowed secretary to whom he is attracted, leaving the Chocolateries. With the chocolaterie's windows shrouded by paper to conceal the big display of new chocolates celebrating new life and Easter, the Count determines to break into the shop and destroy everything. In his frenzied attack on the chocolate, a speck falls on his lip and he tastes it. In an instant, not unlike St Paul's Damascus Road experience, he is converted and gorges himself on chocolate thus breaking the asceticism of his Lenten feast. Exhausted by fasting and battle with Vianne he falls asleep in the shop window where he is found the following morning. Vianne gives him a seltzer drink to revive him. 

As much as the Count is trapped within his self-made prison, so Vianne is trapped by her heritage and itinerant ministry led by the chill North wind. Anouk continually asks if they are going to stay this time rather than having to uproot and move yet again. Vianne carries her Mayan mother's ashes in a vase that during a tussle between her and Anouk becomes broken spilling the contents down the stairs. A contrite Anouk attempts to gather up as much of the ash as possible. This is the beginning of Vianne's own transformative breaking free. When the North wind next visits, Vianne open an upstairs window and casts the ashes into the wind to be blown to the next town to empower someone else to "heal the wounds of friends she hasn't met yet"! 

A repentant and apologetic Count leads the townsfolk into Church for the Easter Sunday celebrations where the Priest preaches from his heart rather than the Count's script and delivers a sermon that places our shared humanity above the following of empty and dead religious rules. Throughout the film, Anouk has narrated the story and as it ends, she describes further tales of life-affirming transformation in the lives and relationships of the villagers - and Roux returns the next summer to be with Vianne and Anouk. And so it seems, everyone lived 'happy ever after' - enjoying each other - and chocolate! 

Although Church features prominently in the film, it is not directly a religious film. However, for those with an eye to see and ears to hear the reading into the story of the power of God through the Holy Spirit to bring positive transformation is in plain sight and sound. The challenge for us is how can be emulate Vianne's life-affirming message. I'll give it 9/10.

The Hunger Games: The Ballad of Songbirds & Snakes

Overall a pleasing prequel. Set 64 years before the first Hunger Games of Katniss Everdeen, the film charts the rise of a teenage Coriolanus Snow (Tom Blyth) on his way to becoming President of Panem. The film is set closer to the time of the first rebellion by the Districts against the Capitol. Snow's father, a General fighting for the Capitol in a feudal Panem has recently died as . The family falls from grace and power and Coriolanus sets about reviving the family's status and fortunes.

As an 18 year-old Academy student, Snow is selected to mentor District 12 tribute Lucy Gray Baird (Rachel Zegler) in the 10th annual Hunger Games which are suffering a ratings slump. The games' creator Casca Highbottom (Peter Drinklage) is anxious to revive the popularity of the spectacle and offers both encouragement and sadistic twists to Snow and the other mentors.

In a dystopian world that is increasingly mirroring our own, the Hunger Games play out with Snow closely involved in the Games and at times actually appearing in the arena. His mentee, tribute Lucy Gray Baird, is a free-spirited songstress who charms viewers by her singing during the reaping ceremony. The Games proceed with the usual violence and spilling of blood under the direction of scary head gamemaker Dr Volumnia Gaul (Viola Davies).

Lucy Gray is depicted as a 'type' of Katniss Everdeen - she is her own woman, charming and beautiful with an inherent distrust of all but her own own people. She is resourceful, kind and compassionate - an underdog that everybody roots for. As the story unfolds, in a very lumpy and inconsistent way, Snow is shown to be ever the ruthless opportunist who will use everyone and everything to his advantage to advance his power and status.

Fans of the franchise will probably be satisfied with this offering with the Hanging Tree motif linking it with the earlier trilogy. The end certainly leaves the door open for further explorations and with the box office bringing in over $250m in the first two weeks of release, the film has already recouped the estimated production budget of $100m. This film could have been a lot worse - but then it could also have been a lot better. The strong points are Drinklage's performance which gives the film gravitas and Zegler's singing. I'll give it 7/10.

The Fabelmans

First section no plot spoilers 😁

Steven Spielberg's long-awaited semi-autobiographical movie delivers the greatest home movie ever made! The film was in gestation for over 20 years, but out of sensitivity to his parents remained unmade until their passing. That in itself demonstrates Spielberg's sensitivity to the emotions of others - a central theme of this film's plot. This sensitivity is like one of two cords twisted together, the other being a passion for storytelling through film. I imagine that it would be possible to view the film and see only one cord which would present a good movie. However, to recognise the two cords and how they are linked in the soul of Spielberg is to watch a great movie!

This allows the film to be seen on the one hand as a two and half hour session of family therapy, whilst on the other, a record of how someone's vocation to be a storyteller through film, is sparked into life and nurtured to powerful fruition. Choosing for himself the family name Fabelman in the film, reinforces his storytelling credentials.

There is so much in this film. It is a gift from a legend whose 34 movies include some of the most memorable of the last 50 years. You could watch this film from its Jewish angle, or from a family dynamics angle, or a love triangle, or movie making or the power of a story to move you. You cannot miss the impact that editing in the art of storytelling has, and how Sam, from an early age, understood and used this power to great effect. If a story doesn't move you, it has failed. This is a most moving film and I'm very happy to give it 9/10.

This fuller section contains some plot spoilers

The opening scene of the film sets up the twin cords beautifully. Outside a New Jersey movie theatre, Sam Fabelman's parents are anxious as they take five year old Sammy to see his first movie - The Greatest show on Earth. They are worried about his reaction to the film. Sammy's father Burt (Paul Dano), explains the technical and scientific principles that underlie filmmaking and why the characters will appear to be so large on the screen. Sammy then turns 180 degrees to receive his mother Mitzi's (Michelle Williams) explanations which are all about art, creativity and emotion. This sets up the central tension between Sammy's parents - the nerdy, scientific, seemingly cold father and the existentialist, creative and passionate mother.

Young Sammy is traumatised by a train crash in the film in which a train carrying a circus on tour, hits a car on the track before ploughing into a second train, also part of the circus entourage. The ensuing violent destruction of people and property is what causes Sammy his difficulty. So affected by what he saw, Sammy asks for a train set for Hanukkah and after receiving it, one night stages a reconstruction of the train crash with his toy train, a car and a wooden Noah's Ark filled with animals like the circus train.

The noise wakens the sleeping the family and Sammy is chastised by his father for damaging expensive engineering whilst his mother immediately sees it as Sammy's way of trying to understand and in some way control the crash he had seen in the film. Recognising how important this process is to Sammy, his mother gives him the family 16mm film camera and invites him to recreate the crash one more time and film it. That way he can watch the film over and over again rather than having to smash up the train set. She says to him "don't tell your father. It will be our little secret".

This introduces a recurring theme whereby on a number of occasions, Sammy is told by a variety of people "this will be our little secret". Sammy becomes the keeper of secrets. Realising the power of film to tell a story Sammy begins making home movies with his sisters before advancing to making films with his Scout Troop. The acquisition of an editing machine allows him to cut and paste different scenes which adds another dimension to Sammy's ability to tell stories through film.

Burt's understanding of the developing technology of computing means that he is head-hunted and given a senior role in a tech company in Phoenix, Arizona meaning that the family uproots and moves south. Burt's best friend and business colleague Bennie (Seth Rogen) is given a job in the same company and relocates with the family to maintain his relationship to Sammy as a surrogate uncle and friend of the family.

The family, along with the ever present Bennie, who is as annoying and he is likeable, take a camping holiday in the Arizona countryside. Sammy captures the fun and frolicking of the holiday on film. Shortly after the vacation, Mitzi's mother dies. In the death scene we have one of many cinematic 'devices' that the film contains. The camera zooms in on the mother's pulsating jugular as the monitor beeps in rhythm. The pulsating stops, the monitor falls silent and the worst is feared. Mitzi is distraught.

Slumping into a depression, Mitzi mopes around the house and is unable to energise and find an outlet for her creativity or passion. Sammy has more movie shooting scheduled with the Scouts when his father asks him to set aside his 'hobby' and edit the vacation film in an effort to produce something that will lift Mitzi's spirits. In the same way that Sammy's earlier home movie of the train crash was a vehicle for his understanding and response to develop, so Burt asks Sammy to make a movie to achieve similar outcomes for Mitzi.

As he reluctantly edits the pieces of film together, Sammy notices that the camera has caught several scenes with Mitzi and Bennie in the background carrying on in  away that clearly shows they have feelings for each other. Sammy decides not to put these scenes in the final edit for his mother but edits them into another movie telling a very different story.

A surprise visit from Mitzi's uncle Boris (Judd Hirsch) a former lion-tamer who has also worked in the movies results in a physical and violent encounter between Boris and Sammy where Boris tells Sammy that both his family and his art will tear his heart apart! This leaves a lastin impression on Sammy.

Sammy increasingly cold-shoulders his mother and they have a confrontation after which Sammy shows Mitzi his Mitzi/Bennie movie by way of explanation. She again becomes distraught and they are reconciled. This becomes another little secret to keep. Bennie is also given the cold-shoulder by Sammy.

Burt's success in his field results in another act of head-hunting which uproots the settled family as they move to Saratoga, California - this time without Bennie. Tensions increase, the family becomes even more dysfunctional and at High School Sam experience anti-Semitism, bullying and romance. As the family relocate from a rental property to a new build, Mitzi's growing depression and Burt's discovery of the affair, result in the announcement of a divorce which devastates Sam and his three sisters.

Mitzi and the girls return to Phoenix and Bennie, whilst Sam lives with Burt in Los Angeles. Sam wants to drop out of college and pursue his vocation of film making. Burt finally encourages Sam to continue writing to film and TV production companies and finally he is offered a junior role on the production of Hogan's Heroes (which I remember fondly from my childhood!). He is introduced to legendary Director John Ford who, in an ill-tempered five minutes, gives him a lesson on where to place the horizon in a shot to make it more interesting. Elated by this gem of advice he skips down the studio lot and the camera tilts to reposition the horizon!

There is plenty of the story that I have not touched on, so I hope I haven't spoiled it for anyone who hasn't seen it. Enjoy!

The Big Lebowski

 

I am a huge fan of the Coen brothers and rate No Country for old men amongst my top ten all time films. I'm not sure how I managed to miss this film and had been looking forward to it. As genius as the Coen brothers can be, they can also make films that simply provoke the question "why?".  Burn After Reading, Hudsucker Proxy and Brother Where art thou among them. Sadly for me, this film joins that list.

This is not a plot driven film - it is character driven by Jeff Bridges' portrayal of the Little Lebowski - The Dude. The film is slapstick comedy with many inept characters. The constancy of Bridges' performance is the unifying thread that draws the film together. Julianne Moore delivers a trademark excellent and offbeat performance as a naked abstract painter - the daughter of the Big Lebowski.

Quite why this has become a cult classic I'm not sure. That a Church of the Latter Day Dude exists is as bizarre as the film itself and the phrase "The Dude Abides" sums up the religion the Dude's disciples follow. 

A major part of the film is set in a Bowling Alley -  The Dude's other activity - his main one being to lounge around drinking White Russians. An unemployed layabout, The Dude is never deflected from the course he sets himself despite a number of extreme and at times violent interventions against him and his possessions. He is not concerned with the detail of events that surround and impact him, but remains focussed on being The Dude.

The are good performances from John Goodman as Walter Sobchak and Steve Buscemi as Donny Kerabatsos as The Dude's friends and bowling partners. But the fanciful plot involving a porn king, his trophy wife and nihilist Germans is too fanciful to be fulfilling. The absurdism is of course intentional and a part of the Coen's storytelling art. I guess you either get it or you don't and on this occasion I didn't. I was looking forward to watching it and was disappointed in the end. I'll give it 5/10.

Barbie

This film makes a simple point in a nuanced and complex way. It is a point worth making and the film does it well. I did however feel it was a bit like using a sledgehammer to crack a nut - it was like having got the Barbie juggernaut rolling, the producers were intent on milking the franchise for all they could get. Not unlike the portrayal of Mattel in the film.

Margot Robbie in the titular role is stunning and Ryan Gosling is well cast as an all singing and all dancing Ken. The film explores fantasy and imagination and our ability to create worlds. It is essentially a film about making meaning and being true to yourself. 

PARTIAL SPOILER ALERT

At the opening of the film, Barbieland is filled with a variety of Barbies and Kens - and an Alan as a nod to those who don't identify as either a Barbie or Ken. The lead Barbie is a 'Stereotypical Barbie' - a point made so many times that it becomes too repetitive in the film. Yes, we are all guilty of stereotyping through unconscious bias and for too long we have allowed consumerism to cajole us into colluding with the status quo.

The utopian Barbieland serves up a pastel, syrupy and idealised beach-front landscape from the American Dream of the post-war era. All the jobs in Barbieland are filled by women from the President to the bin collectors. Ken's function is to do 'beach'. Whilst Barbie is happy to drive to the beach and back every day and host a girls' night in her house every night, Ken is left aching for attention from Barbie for whom he has been made and for whom he has unrequited love. This is the first indication of dysfunction in Barbieland.

Barbie's monotonous routine is broken when she awakens one morning with a preoccupation with death and everything begins to turn sour - even her breakfast milk is off! Such is the state of her malady, that she is sent by the Barbies to see the Scary Barbie who is the only one capable of offering a remedy.

It transpires that Stereotypical Barbie has been affected by the fears and anxieties of her owner playing with her in the real world. In a scene reminiscent of the Wizard of Oz Barbie travels to the real world to confront her owner. Like an alien encounter from Star Trek, Barbie, accompanied by Ken, blunder their way through Venice Beach which is completely strange yet confusingly familiar to them. Having mentioned two films, many more are referenced by a clever script: 2001, Toy Story 3, Matrix, La La Land, Clueless, Midnight Cowboy, Singing in the Rain - the list goes on and on and Director Greta Gerwig admits to being 'inspired' by 29 films in an interview with Letterboxd.

There is much to laugh at in this film and much to shed a tear over. It holds up a mirror and allows the viewer to examine themselves, their prejudices and relationships. The placement of Mattel is brazen as the creator of Barbie and the world's second largest toy maker. The Board of the company is beautifully portrayed in a stereotypically Barbie-kind-of-way and Will Ferrell as the CEO is fantastic. Mattel allowed themselves to be cynically portrayed as a mega-corporation because the film will no doubt launch a massive range of new Barbie paraphernalia - only this time the target will be much wider than has traditionally been the case. Undoubtedly this film will make a lot of money for Mattel. 

I won't spoil all the fun - I'll leave you to watch the film and work out how the dysfunction is accommodated in an evolving Barbieland. But I will say that in another wonderful piece of stereotyping, the pivot around which the story moves, is a speech from Latina single mum Gloria:

It is literally impossible to be a woman. You are so beautiful, and so smart, and it kills me that you don't think you're good enough. Like, we have to always be extraordinary, but somehow we're always doing it wrong.

You have to be thin, but not too thin. And you can never say you want to be thin. You have to say you want to be healthy, but also you have to be thin. You have to have money, but you can't ask for money because that's crass. You have to be a boss, but you can't be mean. You have to lead, but you can't squash other people's ideas. You're supposed to love being a mother, but don't talk about your kids all the damn time. You have to be a career woman but also always be looking out for other people.

You have to answer for men's bad behavior, which is insane, but if you point that out, you're accused of complaining. You're supposed to stay pretty for men, but not so pretty that you tempt them too much or that you threaten other women because you're supposed to be a part of the sisterhood.

But always stand out and always be grateful. But never forget that the system is rigged. So find a way to acknowledge that but also always be grateful.

You have to never get old, never be rude, never show off, never be selfish, never fall down, never fail, never show fear, never get out of line. It's too hard! It's too contradictory and nobody gives you a medal or says thank you! And it turns out in fact that not only are you doing everything wrong, but also everything is your fault.

I'm just so tired of watching myself and every single other woman tie herself into knots so that people will like us. And if all of that is also true for a doll just representing women, then I don't even know.

My significant other helpfully suggests that this speech could just as easily be about men - the point the film makes (repeatedly).

This film is very clever and full in your face, it is visually stunning. It is very pink. The acting is very good and Greta Gerwig as Director and screenplay co-writer deserves plaudits for her creativity, inventiveness and ability to handle a tricky subject in a way that leaves all kinds of people in a better place. For me the film was too long and had too much to say that was repetitive. For its quirkiness and courage, I'll give it 7/10.

Oppenheimer

 The scope of this film is huge. I watched on an IMAX screen which together with a stunning soundtrack made for a completely immersive experience. Often the camera is pulled back offering a wide vista but each frame is packed tight with so much detail. My eyes were kept busy for the entire 3 hours which flew by. This is one of the best films I have ever seen.

This film is not a documentary, neither is exclusively a biopic about Oppenheimer. Essentially this is about people having to make difficult decisions, often with only partial knowledge, in difficult and often time-pressured times. There is no doubt that Christopher Nolan's screenplay depicts Oppenheimer as a conflicted genius with a high moral code and unwavering allegiance to the USA. The way the story is told shows that others saw him differently. My reflections below are not intended to spoil the plot as that has long been in the public domain. As I left the cinema I immediately wanted to go back in and view it again simply because there is so much going on in the film and I wanted to check out my understanding of some of the roles of some characters in the stories. 

The story of this film is non-linear as there are three intertwined threads which are edited together as the narrative progresses in each of them - a trademark of Nolan's film-making:

• Oppenheimer's journey from Cambridge in 1929 to Los Alamos in 1945.
• Oppenheimer's security clearance hearing in 1954.
• Admiral Lewis Strauss' congressional clearance hearing in 1959.

Each of the threads has its own different pace which is a very clever device - the 1954 security hearing being shot in black and white - a first for IMAX. This works very well but seeing many of the same characters simultaneously in three different time-frames takes a lot of concentration.

In addition to Cillian Murphy in the title role, the film contains many of the great names of scientific advancement made in the twentieth century. Tom Conti delivers an endearing characterisation of Albert Einstein,  Kenneth Branagh as Niels Bohr, Matthias Schweighöfer as Werner Heisenberg and Benny Safdie as Edward Teller. There are very strong acting performances from Robert Downey Junior, Florence Pugh, Matt Damon and Emily Blunt. A stellar cast.

The film clearly depicts Oppenheimer as a driven man but it also shows him as being impulsive, at times petulant, able to show high degrees of empathy and understanding of people and always highly principled. Once appointed to lead the Manhattan Project at Los Alamos, Oppenheimer shows a deft touch in recruiting the right scientists to work on the different aspects of the project and in resolving the inevitable clashes of personality and ego. His clashes with Lt General Groves (Matt Damon) over the project's progress being slowed by the need for security-driven compartmentalisation brought energy and passion from both characters. His sexual liaisons with the Communist Jean Tatlock (Pugh) who herself was psychologically unstable, added intrigue and the masterfully shot sex fantasy scene during the security clearance hearing was pure artistry from Nolan. 

Oppenheimer's continued association with known Communists and the fact that his brother was one, served to undermine Federal confidence in his allegiance. His oral and financial support for Spanish Republicans was also seen as a possible indication of a lack of patriotism as the monies were channelled through Spanish Communists. Oppenheimer's wife Kitty (Blunt) was also a former Communist which added further ammunition to those seeking to question Oppenheimer's allegiance. The weight of circumstantial evidence was growing.

From early on, the film sketched out the ethical considerations of turning the theory of atomic fission into reality and the possible consequences of that in military hands. Einstein cautions Oppenheimer who is throughout the film exercised by doubt about the human and political cost of detonating such a weapon of mass destruction. He was not in a hurry to divert resources to developing the even more powerful Hydrogen Bomb and in a later meeting with Truman urged the President to exercise restraint and caution which was seen as a sign of Oppenheimer's weakness. It is clear that Oppenheimer was haunted by the destructive power of what he had created and showed remorse for the thousands of innocent civilians killed in the two Japanese cities. He is portrayed as regretting not having completed the project in time for the bomb to be deployed against Hitler to end the Holocaust whilst noting that the majority of top German scientists working on the project were also Jewish.

The race was on between the Germans, Russians and Americans to develop the technology first and therein lies the intermingling of politics and militarised science. As soon as the experimental Trinity detonation was successful, the project was completely taken over by the military and symbolically the bombs were driven away from Los Alamos for deployment to Japan. As the trucks drove across the New Mexico desert, the chains on the cases clanked as though to symbolise that humanity was now in bondage to the deadly potential of this technology.

An area of contrast that ran throughout the story was that of morality and ethical standards. This was explored in a number of ways from Oppenheimer's support for a wide range of social causes to the politicians using whatever means to advance their own position. In the end, this became focussed in the persons of Oppenheimer and Strauss and their respective hearings. One side was shown to be shallow, manipulative and completely narcissistic, whilst the other was principled and did things for the greater good at considerable personal cost. The politicians came out this very poorly whilst the scientists gave me faith that they had acted in the best of the majority's interest. Whether this was a construct of Nolan's screenplay or close to the truth I don't know - but I like to believe it.

As I said this was so good I wanted to back in to watch it again - one of the best films I have ever seen. I cannot give it anything other than 10/10!

Everything, Everywhere, All at Once

If cinematically, the Wachowskis, Quentin Tarantino and Stanley Kubrick were to have a love child, this would be it! The Matrix meets Cloud Atlas meets Kill Bill meets 2001. Yes this film is highly derivative, but it makes no attempt to disguise it as it mishmashes a number of genres together in a high-octane psycho-philosophy fantasy that is also a morality tale. It is at the same time highly original. The format and many of the ideas are very Asian but the context, visualisation and narrative arc are Western. All very postmodern! I liked it.

To enter into watching this film unprepared would leave many viewers confused and numb. I felt I would number among them if I didn't do a little research before diving in. I'm glad I did as this is one film where knowing something of the plot before you watch enhances the viewing experience - at least it did for me. I reveal some of the plot below - but with this film, I really don't think it matters!

I'm not sure where to start. There are some very good acting performances here. For me the stand out was from Jamie Lee Curtis who played her 'dominating female in charge' role to chilling perfection as an IRS Tax Agent. A masterstroke was for her desk to contain a number of Employee of the Month awards in the shape of butt plugs. A wonderful comment on the necessary evil of tax gathering regimes worldwide.

The central character Evelyn Wang (Michelle Yeoh), is having a midlife crisis in the midst of an IRS audit whilst her husband Waymond (Ke Huy Quan), is desperately trying to get her attention for a simple conversation, her daughter Joy (Stephanie Hsu) is in a committed same sex relationship with Becky (Tallie Medel) which risks upsetting Evelyn's father Gong Gong (James Hong) and spoiling the upcoming Chinese New Year Party for family and customers at the Laundromat they run. The dialogue is fast and furious, as is the action.

If all of this wasn't complicated enough, the story is told across a multiverse where each character exists in parallel dimensions created by the options and choices they face in their lives. Consequently, there is a lot of jumping between different parallel universes and differing expressions of the same characters within those universes in a titanic battle of good over evil. Evelyn is battling for good and has to make completely unpredictable choices, which is what she usually does anyway, as she flips between universes taking on the manifestation of evil in her daughter, who has created the everything bagel with everything on it, which has become a quantum singularity pulling everything into its gravitational field. All pretty non-routine stuff! I felt at home in the multiverse of this film as it reflected pretty well what is going on inside my head most of the time!

There is a lot of psychology, of varying traditions, in this film along with Freudian explorations of sexual fantasy, S & M and dominatrix scenes involving fingers that are hot dogs filled with American mustard! There is a lot of Kung Fu fighting and violence in the style of Kill Bill and The Matrix - all beautifully choreographed and fantasised.  As I said - non-routine.

If you can navigate your way through this cosmos of confusion, you might get to enjoy many of the comedic moments which manifest themselves when often least expected. What the film does offer is a story where courage, doubt, sacrifice and love all feature prominently. If you are looking for a postmodern retelling of the Gospel with a female Saviour, this film may just be for you.  The film invites us to reflect on our motivation for the choices we make in life and the possible consequences, both intended and unintended that arise. It also invites reflection on our relationships and how we invest in them and maintain them. As I said, I liked it. I'll give it 8/10.

Gemini Man

 

Maybe I'm getting back into watching movies - one of my long Covid symptoms. I feel I can agree to concentrate on the film for its entirety once again. Feels good. 😁

I hadn't seen this before and caught it on TV recently. Will Smith usually turns in performances in likeable characters and this time is no exception as he play DIA assassin Henry Brogan. There is plenty of action in this film, some clever special effects and a strong performance from Mary Elizabeth Winstead as Danny Zakarewski in support.

PLOT SPOILER

The premise of the film is quite simple although it takes a while to emerge. As an ageing assassin, Brogan is looking to retire. He is deemed to be such a valuable asset that the DIA cannot allow the loss of his services. One of Brogan's superiors, Clay Varris (Clive Owen) has seen this scenario developing and has taken action some years ago to negate the consequences. He sends Brogan on a mission with false data about the target who turns out to be an innocent scientist rather than an terrorist. This creates the pretext for Brogan to be labelled rogue, giving Brogan's Director the means to eliminate him. 

This is established fairly early on in the film and the narrative develops into a series of high action sequences as Brogan escapes his pursuers. As we might expect, any film directed by Ang Lee is going to have a lot of action!

Having eliminated the 'pack of pursuers' Brogan is left being hunted down by someone who seems to know exactly what he will do - even before he knows himself. It turns out the bent Director Varris cloned a new Brogan from a DNA sample some years before and the fitter, faster new version of Brogan seems to have the upper edge. Once the likeness has been established, clever CGI presents us with a youthful Will Smith trying to kill an older version of himself. Hence the title Gemini Man.

Apart from the questions about governments carrying out targeted assassinations on our behalf for the greater good (James Bond?), it raises questions about Eugenics where genetics are tweaked to enhance and improve the human condition, removing natural selection from the equation. If you want to explore movies with this theme, there are plenty more here.

At the end of the day this is an action film about good versus evil that uses an interesting mechanism to offer the entertainment. Standard Hollywood output. The film is set within the brutal world of clandestine cloak and dagger morality and lacks any finesse in the way the story lines are explored. Things are very black and white, which I guess is a good thing because I for one, really don't want this kind of thing going on - even if it is for my greater well-being. I'll give it 6/10.

Dune (2021)

 

I missed this in the cinema but watched the DVD yesterday with the sound cranked up and house vibrating. Excellent! I enjoyed it. A very expansive film which suited the huge scope of Frank Herbert's 1965 original novel. This is Part 1 covering on the first half of the book. Part 2 will follow as soon as they can reassemble the cast and crew spurred on by critical acclaim and box office success.

It is said that there is nothing new under the sun and this film felt a bit like The Matrix on the beach with added Jedi as the Bene Gesserit. Everything is derivative of something else and Herbert predates both George Lucas and the Wachowskis. 

Dune can be read many ways but I saw it primarily as a morality tale. The noble house of Atreides mysteriously given the planet Arrakis to govern by the Emperor, only to find themselves wiped out by the house of Harkonnen - the house they displaced. All for power, control and wealth wrapped up in a web of deceit and conspiracy. It all sounds horribly familiar! 

Set roughly 20,000 years in the future, it is clear to see that human moral and ethical behaviour development has not, on the whole, kept pace with technology. This is no Star Trek humanist utopia. The same weaknesses and foibles continue to beset the different races, all very reminiscent of a prototypical Edenic Adam. The new Adam or Saviour, with special powers he does not yet fully recognise or know how to control, is Paul Atreides (Timothee Chalamet) who is guided by his father's top courtiers and of course his mother, Lady Jessica Atreides (Rebecca Ferguson) of the Bene Gesserit.

The planet Arrakis is the sole source of 'spice', a granular substance blowing on the winds of the planet and mixed in with the sand that covers most of the planet's surface. Within the sand live giant sandworms that travel at high speed and devour anything that gets in their way. They respond to rhythmic sounds such as walking or the operation of spice harvesting machines. Because of this and the extreme waterless climate, existence on the planet's surface is challenging. Spice is a valuable substance that bestows its users heightened vitality and expanded consciousness. It is critical for interstellar travel as it allows Space-Guiding Navigators to use a limited form of prescience to safely navigate interstellar space. Whoever is fief ruler of Arrakis, controls spice harvesting and supply across the universe - a powerful and lucrative thing.

With so much skulduggery at play, it is of course hard to know who to trust and who to avoid (or kill). The universe is a brutal and violent place. Paul Atreides will, of course, face many challenges on his quest to deliver salvation to the planet by bringing peace with the indigenous Fremen, maintain the honour of his house and capture the love of his life Chani (Zendaya), a Fremen.

If you like sand, worms, battle on an epic scale, heroism and love, then this is a tale for you. This is a faithful adaptation of Herbert's book and captures the ambiance and feel of Arrakis very well. The cinematography is stunning as is the original soundtrack - not to mention the sound effects in full Dolby Atmos. I am sure this will do well at the awards ceremonies and hasten the delivery of Part 2. I'll give it 8/10.

Belfast

I grew up listening to the twin soundtrack of the troubles in Northern Ireland and Vietnam. It is very hard to know what influence, if any, this experience had on my upbringing. This film's visceral and intimate  portrait connected deeply with memories I had long since buried deep within. The central character in this film is a nine-year-old boy called Buddy (Jude Hill). Set in Belfast in 1969 we are invited into Buddy's world as The Troubles begin to erupt on the terraced streets of the city. I am almost exactly the same age as Buddy and although I was physically far removed from Belfast, the film struck a deep resonance with me as I realised that this film could have been telling my story rather than Kenneth Branagh's.

This is in part a coming-of-age story. Buddy is trying to make sense of the world through his school work, a crush on classmate Catherine and guidance and wisdom he receives from his extended family. Into this already potent mix, the ugly horror of sectarian violence literally explodes outside his front door. Buddy's world is forever changed. Things suddenly get a lot more confusing and Buddy's context becomes one of black and white with little room for grey. The opening and closing scenes of the film are shot in vivid colour like some tourist promo for visiting the city. The story itself is beautifully lit and shot in black and white. The detailed sets took me back to my childhood and the reality of the story was reinforced by the inclusion of archive news stories such as Robin Day interviewing then Prime Minister, Harold Wilson.

As a semi-autobiographical film, it is very hard to question the story we are presented with as it flows from the subjective memories of nine year-old Branagh as he recalls them. Buddy lives on a street where Catholics and Protestants happily coexist as neighbours - why should it be anything other? Violence and threats are used to make the minority Catholic residents move out to create a pure Protestant ghetto. The British Army are deployed to maintain order amidst the growing unrest and the film manages to communicate the growing sense of unease amongst the families in the local community as they try to work out what is going on. This is not a conflict of their making or choosing and they struggle with being coerced to take sides.

At the heart of this film is the depiction of a family's honest struggle to survive, to do the right thing and to stay true to their heritage of being Belfast people. Buddy's father, Pa (Jamie Dornan) is a hard working joiner trying to provide for his family. Work is scarce in Northern Ireland and he works away in England visiting the family every couple of weeks. Trying to pay off his tax arrears and sustain his gambling habit stretches the family finances and creates tensions between Pa and Ma (Caitriona Balfe) which are heightened by the sense of threat The Troubles bring. Pa suggests the family emigrate to Australia or Canada where work is plentiful but the others do not want to leave their home and family. Pa's parents, Granny (Judy Dench) and Pop (Ciarán Hinds) impart their wisdom to the next generations as they approach the twilight of their lives. Family is at the heart of this film. Brannagh implicitly celebrates his family and the domestic security that nurtured him.

On more than one occasion the film's dialogue portrays the perceived Protestant collective understanding that Catholics are morally weak as all they do is go confession once a week and then live as they please knowing they can seek forgiveness again next week. At Granny's insistence, Buddy and brother Will (Lewis McAskie) attend chapel every Sunday. We share part of an impassioned sermon delivered by the Minister where the stark choice between the narrow straight road and the wide and easy road that descends to the eternal and inescapable lakes of burning sulphur is spelt out. More coercion in the name of religion. A painful reminder of sermons I sat through in the early days of my own faith and an encouragement to preach somewhat differently today!

The ensemble cast give a strong performance and the narrative arc is well paced and delivers some surprises. I feared other things might happen to the family but that merely demonstrated the power of fear and my imaginations ability to think the worst. This film has just picked up a pile of BAFTA nominations and I am sure it will feature at the Oscars too - and deservedly so. Branagh is a master storyteller and this film is so personal it draws you in and engenders empathy for Buddy and his family - as I watched, I began to care deeply what happened to Buddy. Yes, there are moments of gloopy sentimentality and I for one could have been spared the closing morality lesson delivered by Pa to Buddy in the final scene.

Ultimately this is a film about hope, love and relationships. It is also a film that shows how to tell a story in an uncomplicated way. It is a beautifully made film. I hope that it will inspire many people to visit Belfast and to discover not only something of the pain of the memories of The Troubles, but to explore the vibrant passion that has enabled a new Belfast to rise from the ashes and become the pulsating city it is today. I'll give it 8/10.

The Matrix Resurrections

 

Regular viewers of this blog will have no surprise that I caught this as soon as possible on release. The hype surrounding it's release was huge and the wall of uncertainty that had been constructed to obscure it's story and plot was both immense and effective. This all added to a growing pile of questions that I formed in anticipation of seeing The Matrix IV.

• Would I like it?
• Would I understand it?
• How many of the old characters would be in it and how would they interface with new ones?
• How would they explain Neo's resurrection.
• Would it be more overtly about transgender issues?
• How would the makers advance groundbreaking cinematography and would it represent another step change?
• Would it leave the door open for Matrix V?

I did like it and watching it was like putting on a familiar and well-loved top coat - it felt comfortable as the digital and real worlds were presented in accessible ways. I will need to watch it again - more than once - to gain a fuller understanding of the plot which is both a reflection on my limitations and the cleverness with which it was conceived and presented. 

The film continues to be situated in the centre ground of Postmodern philosophy and Baudrillard's questions and concepts are its anchor points. It explores concepts of what is real and what is not, as well as how do we know truth from untruth. It wouldn't be a Matrix film without blue and red pills and the consequences of the choices we make coming to define our identity. As I said, all very Postmodern. I liked it as it offers questions and not necessarily answers.

The blending of old with new was handled particularly well I thought. It was cleverly done and offered just enough of the old to make the plot development believable. There was enough that was familiar and enough that was new that required analysis and exploration. I feel it would be difficult to watch this film passively - it requires engagement and work. The start of the film is particularly clever and it's resonances will warm the hearts of die hard Matrix fans. I found myself joining in the dialogue in places as it stayed close to the tried and trusted Matrix formula.

The whole point of fiction is that it can go anywhere you want to as long as it is to some extent convincing. The utopian explanation for Neo's resurrection is pleasing and no more far fetched than any other part of the narrative. I was anticipating more fetish costumes and allusions to trans allegories but I found neither present.

The cinematography whilst eye popping at times, doesn't present any innovations on the scale of bullet time or circular slow motion sweeping camera movements, but there some interesting slow-mo sequences. The ever-present green cast of life in the Matrix is a helpful identifier - there is even a black cat called deja-vu! There are of course many fight scenes - featuring one-to-one, group and crowd scenes. Rather than presenting much that is innovative, they are a rehash of scenes from I-III with the volume turned up - and yes, there are helicopter gunships 😊!

As familiar as the beginning was, I did not anticipate the ending - and I'm certainly not going to spoil it for you. Does it leave the door open for Matrix V? In terms of plot, I'll leave you to decide. In terms of box office reception, perhaps not - but then the original Matrix back in 1999 was a sleeper for a long time before achieving cult status. I would happily watch it again - probably more than once! I'll give it 7/10.

Once Upon a Time in Hollywood

I am a huge fan of the way Tarantino tells stories. I don't think there is anyone quite like him making films. This is a masterpiece. Growing up in the 1960s was the era when Westerns and American TV programmes were the staple on both TV channels. The visual texture of this film feels so spot on and the way the cinematography is lit and captured make it a feast for the eyes. Anyone who has been along Sunset Strip, driven past the iconic Capitol Records Tower or toured the Hollywood Hills will have recognised many of the famous sites. 

The fact that this film is a realist fairy-tale referencing and featuring many of the characters of the period only adds to, the at times, almost documentary feel of the film. Tarantino takes facts and real Hollywood characters, puts them in a bag and shakes them up, and then empties the bag, representing them in a jumbled retelling of the final years of Hollywood's golden era. It is literally as though Tarantino makes a memory dump onto the screen and arranges the images with a connecting narrative. Simply amazing.

Whilst the film captures the excesses of the times in its portrayal of drugs, sex and the rock and roll lifestyle, even featuring a scene at the Playboy Mansion, it also contains characters and acts which demonstrate great virtue. Whilst most of the characters in the film seem to be out to get whatever they can, Brad Pitt's Oscar winning character Cliff Booth oozes a cool strength and courage whilst being loyal to his friend and employer Rick Dalton played by Leonardo DiCaprio. Booth is however also capable of great violence - a not so virtuous trait. In the film Cliff Booth is rumoured to have killed his wife although he was never charged with her murder - surely more than a passing reference to Natalie Wood and Robert Wagner?

The innocent beauty of Margot Robbie's Sharon Tate wafts through the film punctuating it with a feeling akin to walking into a air-conditioned building when it's hot outside. The menace of the Manson gang holed up at the Spahn Ranch foreshadows the soon to pass Tate murders. After a six month spell in Italy shooting Spaghetti Westerns, Dalton returns to Hollywood with an Italian wife who is a conflation of Sophia Loren, Gina Lollobrigida and other Italian sirens of the period. The way in which this film interweaves fiction and reality, and then presents each as the other is extremely clever.

The fickle nature of celebrity which is an integral part of Hollywood is explored from many different angles. The whole premise of the film is that Dalton's career is waning and Booth's work as a stuntman has all but dried up. They feel disconnected from a Hollywood they no longer recognise. We see an emerging Bruce Lee (Mike Moh), Steve McQueen (Damian Lewis) at the height of his game and even Mama Cass (Rachel Redleaf) and Michelle Phillips (Rebecca Rittenhouse) from the Mamas and the Papas. 

This film offers a unique portrait of Hollywood in 1969. It is very cleverly conceived and Tarantino's screenplay and Direction are phenomenal. The casting is spot on even if many of the first choices either didn't pass audition or were unavailable through other projects. There is a huge and interesting exploration of the film on Wikipedia - well worth a look. As you may have gathered, I enjoyed this trip back to my childhood. Thank you Quenten. I'll give it 8/10.

Nomadland

I watched this film with a group of friends at church as part of our discipleship programme exploring themes of 'home' this term. I found the film to be very depressing but I'm glad I saw it as its multiple messages are important and need to be heard and seen. Others found the film uplifting. It's just as well not everybody is like me! I guess it's a 'Marmite" film - as it appears was the score of plinky piano and a cello being sawed in half - yep, I didn't like that much either!

For me this was a film whose story was primarily about two things: remembering and relationships. To remember literally means to put back together. For me, the film pivoted around a scene where a helpful friend had accidentally dropped a box containing some crockery that Fern (Frances McDormand) had very strong sentimental attachment to - and for good reason. A plate was broken that was part of a dinner service given to her by her now dead father - the design was Fall Leaves. As Fern painstakingly glued the pieces back together, she remembered her strong bond with her father and felt again the pain of loss.

The pain of loss lies at the heart of this film - yet there is hope for Fern and those she shares her nomadic lifestyle with. The town in which Fern and her husband lived and worked was a one employer town and everybody worked at the factory or in one of the businesses supporting the community. When the factory closed the town became a ghost town and everybody became jobless and houseless as the company also provided housing. Not long afterwards, her husband died. Fern had lost her job, her husband and now her home. All she had left was a van. The van became more than just a home for Fern. It contained many of her memories and she had customised the interior with things from her previous home and life and possessions of her husband. Although houseless, Fern never considers herself to be homeless, as home is somewhere deep within.

Other characters in the film - many of them real life nomads, have also experienced loss. With a social security system unable to provide a living pension, many of these people could not afford to live in a house or flat despite a lifetime of paying tax. A rent free van or RV and the empty desert was all they had. With monochromatic landscapes and shot almost exclusively with hand-held cameras (not even steadycams) and often in extreme facial close-up, the characters offer an openness and honesty which allies with the integrity of their way of life. Not once in the 103 minute run time did we see a law enforcement officer - there was no need of them. Often it is clear that the dialogue is improvised but it works so well.

What we did see plenty of was community. Relationships were the second key theme for me. Fern was widowed and childless. Later in the film we discover she has a sister. She forms attachments to a number of characters such as Linda (Linda May) and Swankie (Charlene Swankie) and is torn about her feelings for Dave (David Strathairn) with whom the prospect of a romance develops throughout the film. The group of nomads rally around Bob (Bob Wells) who delivers quasi-philosophical witterings that find an a welcoming home amongst the semi hippy nomads. His rhetoric helps them to find an identity as a group.

The starkness of the nomadic lifestyle forces each nomad to face up to the reality of death at some point. There is a lot tree-hugging New Age type communing with nature with a strong 'everything in the universe is connected' feel. We could learn much from this. The way the narrative plays out, sets up a dichotomy between a settled life with a job and a mortgage, family responsibilities and social engagements against the freedoms of being a nomad. Twice in the film, Fern is offered permanent accommodation, first with her sister and later with Dave's son's family. She rejects both offers and returns to the open road.

Whilst some of the nomads appeared to be fairly static or stayed within one locale, others were clearly on a never-ending road trip and others like Fern, followed seasonal work around the country. We see Fern joining the Christmas recruits at an anonymous Amazon Fulfillment Centre picking and packing goods for Christmas. She then moves on to working in a restaurant and then being an attendant at a  camping and RV ground and in the autumn works the sugar beet harvest. Throughout she demonstrates that she is no shirker, Fern is a hard worker with a strong moral code and a predisposition to always be looking out for others in her community. She is generous and loving - at least as far as her own limitations allow.

If ever a script had Frances McDormand's name on it, this is it - she also co-Produced the film. She not so much acts but feels like one of the real life nomads in the film (therefore is an excellent actor!). Her character Fern commands attention. With Chloë Zhao's sensitive and detailed Direction and the hand-held camera work, this film offers an intimate portrait of an important and growing slice of American society. Has the American Dream simply been illusory for them or are they living it? As I said above, this film has much that is important to say and its three Oscars testify to that. If you've not seen the film, do see it. I'll give it 7/10.

No Time to Die

At 25 has James Bond finally come of age? In Daniel Craig's last outing as 007 in the 25th film in the franchise, we find a more mature Bond and for that matter a more mature Bond movie. In many ways it's the same as its predecessors but at the same time there are welcome differences.

I was wondering if the 2:43 runtime would drag. It doesn't. The narrative maintains a steady march towards its conclusion. There are many strands to the narrative arc of this film's story. They intertwine and play with each other trading emotions as they do so. On more than one occasion we see Bond paralysed by confliction where the old and new Bonds battle for a decision. 

The exotic locations are there - stunning light in Puglia, lush vegetation in the Caribbean, frozen Norway with spectacular bridges and coastline, The Faroe Islands and of course Scotland. In the London scene above, I used to work in the building on the left in 1979! 

What is not there is the serial abuser of women. His harsh and brutal career has seemingly taught  Commander Bond what really matters in life. This is a film about love, truth, integrity, sacrifice and loss. Of course greed, revenge and megalomania all feature too, but these are left for others to inhabit.

There are plenty of wild and exciting chases using a wide variety of vehicles, death defying jumps and the ever present product placement - mainly of brands identified as British even if their owners these days reside in other territories. There are very strong acting performances from a great ensemble cast. Christoph Waltz emanates a power that transcends the confinement of his character, Léa Seydoux displays a vulnerability alongside steeliness,  Rami Malek is flesh-creepingly sinister and Ana de Armas will, I am sure, reappear to beautifully support the British Secret Service once again.

This film is sensitive to many of the things that increasingly matter in our evolving world. Dealing with a potential world-wide pandemic, showing greater respect to women, calling out a lack of integrity, two black women in lead roles and changing world order.

This is my first visit to the cinema in 21 months. It felt good. The sound and visual treats of this film demand the largest screen you can find to watch it on. Pay the extra if you can. This film does deserve the hype and I am sure it will go down in the canon of Bond films as one of the best.  I'm going to give it 8/10.