I, Claude Monet

Seen at the Rivoli Theatre, Camberwell VIC

Bea says: Cecil and I picked this out due to its time and location; we wanted to visit this cinema which is not nearby our home at all, and were fitting it in with another event we had on in that area.  I had no idea about the "Exhibition on Screen" series prior to this, and loved it.  I have to say, it was one of the most relaxing and absorbing cinema events I have been to for a long time.  The gentle music, the images of Monet's works (often repetitive, as he was known to paint the same scene many times over), fading in and out of real life footage of the scene, whilst listening to the narration of his letters, was fascinating and I could have sat there for much longer (something I actually rarely say about film, much as I enjoy the cinema).

Monet's early life was a struggle financially and for recognition, and it was interesting to listen to the tone of the letters change into his later, more well-off and established life, and watch the development of his famous garden, which I have never visited but is now definitely on my bucket list.

Highly recommended, as is anything from this series, which I shall now be following much more closely.

****

Cecil says: The film had already started when we walked in so I’m not even sure if the contemporary scene of a small ferry tug on the harbour waters (in Le Havre, I think) with a voiceover from Monet (voice of Henry Goodman) was the actual opening scene of I, Claude Monet.

But it certainly set the tone for the whole of this Exhibition on Screen genre movie, which switched between shots of Monet’s works filling the screen and contemporary footage of the places he painted.

I actually liked the way the producers faded so easily from current day footage to paintings, and it’s extraordinary in many cases how the scenes or buildings even haven’t changed that much in upto 150 years.

I had no idea in advance that this would be the whole of the film and that there would be no characters, dialogue or plot to speak of.

All the text of the voiceovers was taken from lines of Monet’s correspondence (2,500 letters apparently), so it gives little insights into different stages of the artist’s life. But it also meant that lots of things were left unanswered.

So we get the impression that this Impressionist was on the one hand overwhelmed constantly by the beauty of the natural world around him, but was also anxious and depressed a lot of the time by the penury he appeared to be living in for many years of his long life.

He writes very openly to friends and acquaintances he obviously regards as wealthier than him, asking for funds - once even for a 20 franc note, very specific that one - and intimating frequently that he would be out in the streets if funds weren’t somehow to be forthcoming.

But we never really find out what happened when he reached the edge of destitution like that or how we got himself out of each fix he was in.

Having studied 19th century French history, I was fascinated by the absence of any comment on the political context of his life (though Wikipedia suggests he was in fact quite a leftie, which means the Paris Commune of 1870 must surely have figured in his life. It actually reminded me of Flaubert whose arty character in one novel set while the 1848 revolution was raging inside Paris was lounging around the grass outside town musing on life, while the socialists battled inside the city for radical change.

It also reminded me of a film I saw some years ago called simply London, which consisted of footage of parts of London being mentioned in the (fictional?) narrative being spoken in a voiceover. These are not the sorts of films to go to for a night out, I don’t think, but I, Claude Monet kind of worked for our mood on a December Sunday, especially in such a beautiful cinema, which is a work of art itself.

I was also intrigued by the sudden appearance of Georges Clemenceau in Monet’s life. I wonder if some sort of explanatory subtitles might have helped at points like these. How many viewers - especially in a place like Australia - would even know that Clemenceau was a key political figure of his day? And how on earth did Monet come to have such connections that he can simply mention him as ‘Georges’. An early version of ‘Tony’, ‘Gordon’ and then ‘Dave’ in the UK?

***.5  

Ladies in Black

Seen at the Regent Theatre, Ballarat, VIC

Cecil says: Ladies in Black is the kind of film I could go and see over and over again, and probably always pick up new little insights into life in 1959 (the year of my birth, funnily enough, so I don’t have actual memories of that time myself!). It stands alongside Strictly Ballroom as one of those films I will no doubt see more than once and not tire of, so it must be my top film of 2018, I think.

There are so many aspects that make this a charming watch: the coming-of-age (but not at all in a sexual way) of school-leaver Lisa (one of the big moves she makes to ‘come of age’ is to drop her androgynous name ‘Lesley’ and start a new life at work as ‘Lisa”); the arrival and gradual acceptance of ‘new’ migrants from other parts of Europe than the UK and Ireland; the social limits on behaviour and propriety, leading to some hilarious and some touching moments, as two of the Ladies in Black deal with developing relationships.

It’s all set in Sydney, so any shots with backdrop to the City and CBD are obviously computer-generated, but there is also careful filming on the harbour, managing to avoid any new build that has sprung up since the 1950s, and use of that beautiful old department store building in the city with its original façade.

As a child in Sydney in 1967, I became a geeky ‘collector’ of bus numbers and destinations, so I know that Circular Quay was the main bus destination in those days (rather than the current-day Wynyard), so the child geek in me was pleased to see Circular Quay on the front of many of the buses shown in Ladies in Black.

There were slightly melodramatic characters like Magda, who managed the up-market couture dresses in the store and was obviously used to mixing in finer circles than other shop assistants, but was having to adapt to Australia’s more working-class but increasingly affluent society.

And there were the lovely cameo characters like Miss Cartwright, who had a soft spot for Lisa from the start, and obviously wants her to make the most of the opportunities open to young women in 1959 that weren’t there for women oi her generation. She’s almost the most beautiful character in the film, managing to overcome any regrets at an unfulfilled life herself to wish well to a new generation starting out.

I was a bit confused at first over the two brunettes who were friends and colleagues of Fay. I thought they were the same person at the start, which is another reason to see this film again.

And in a sense, although Lisa was the central character, it was Fay whose story we followed as closely and who spoke for her own generation at the time: intelligent but not educated; fed up with boorish men in their lives; but lacking opportunities to break out, until the arrival of the new immigrants into Australia.

Well, these are just a few of the highlights for me. I’m sure on second viewing, I’ll find more favourite bits to comment on, so look forward to when it comes back to some cinemas for a second run…

*****

Bea says: I was very keen to see this film because when I saw the preview (at the cinema attending another film) I saw that one of the storylines is about the arrival of the "New Australians" during the 1940s-early 1970s and their assimilation into Australian life.  I am very interested in this topic, as I am the daughter of New Australians myself, and I have just started to notice with pleasure more in Australian literature and film on this - I suspect because the children of the New Australians are now well into adulthood and are writing and making films and art about their influences.

However, Ladies in Black in actually based on an early novel by Madeleine St John - who I know from her later, award winning work The Essence of the Thing; I had no idea she was even Australian, and from my (brief) recent research into her after seeing Ladies in Black I don't think she is of New Australian stock.  It turns out she was at Sydney University with Bruce Beresford, the film's director, and I suspect that Ladies in Black is a coming of age, semi-autobiographical work of hers; she is likely to have identified pretty strongly with Lisa (Lesley), who is busy having her horizons opened (by the New Australians) and reinventing herself during her summer department store job, before starting her first term at Sydney University.  I have to say that Sydney University is a pretty magical place; I spent a year teaching there on a contract in 2017, and my heart skipped with excitement whenever I walked through the main campus - it really feels like a historic place where any possibility can happen...

Other than Lisa's storyline, we follow several other of the department store staff, who are all at different moments in their lives and so the film explores such things as finding a partner, marriage and infertility, spinsterhood, work and life decisions, but with Beresford's light touch, wry sense of humour and beautiful cinematography.

It certainly really spoke to me, and to Cecil, but I have heard mixed reviews amongst friends.  But I say - go and see it; it may speak volumes to you about your life, or not, but if not it will certainly be a pleasant diversion, particularly if you have any memories of Sydney life in earlier decades.  I also gifted the DVD to my parents for Christmas.

*****

Boy Erased

Seen at the Westgarth Theatre, Northcote VIC

Cecil says: Another film seen at the Westgarth as part of my Vintage Victoria cinema search. So seen without Bea this time, too.

Boy Erased has had good reviews. It even got a mention at my little local film club as a film on release that we should all see. But I actually found it a bit depressing, and even made me think of a kind of LGBT version of Handmaid's Tale, seeing a dystopian America, where the religious fundamentalists rule and anything outside the very orthodox around gender and sexuality is to be not only hidden but punished.

The trouble is, unlike The Handmaid's Tale, however real that may become, Boy Erased is based on real life characters so this really did happen.

Basically it is about a gay man, whose father is a church minister preaching about moral rectitude week-in, week-out, and his Mum goes along with what the father wants.

And what the father wants, after getting advice from other awful church elders, is to send his son off for conversion therapy to help him rid himself of the sin of homosexuality.

The whole concept is deeply disturbing, as are some of the scenes both inside the 'education' centre, and in Jared's own initiation into gay sex, where he basically gets raped.

It all ends up OK, and Jared manages to come out of it - still gay, of course - with his mind and his family relationships intact, but this is not a feel-good movie. And I was dying to ask the gay couple next to me what they made of it; what their overall feeling at the end was? Depression at the oppression, or lifted up by the outcomes?

I didn't feel able to ask them and they left just before I did.

Nicole Kidman and Russell Crowe are good, though I'm not sure why they cast two Aussies in these middle American roles. Lucas Hedges is excellent at Jared Eamons.

Not the most uplifting end to a lovely afternoon at the Westgarth

***

Hello Hemingway

Seen at the Latin American Film Festival at the Westgarth Theatre, Northcote VIC

Cecil says: I went to this one on my own as part of my Vintage Victoria project, because I wanted to see the Westgarth Theatre. So I just chose whatever film they had on next.

I was really pleased to see this Cuban period drama made in 1990 so not a new release, but interesting as it was set in 1956 as political unrest was growing in Cuba.

Funnily enough, it came hot on the heels of our seeing Ladies in Black (still not quite done our review of that one), which was also set in the 1950s and had as its central focus a school girl coming-of-age.

The Cuban one was fascinating and showed the difficulty of the bright, bookish Larita, who dreams of getting a scholarship to study in the States, but is up against a bunch of posh kids from private schools. It's not her education which lets her down, but her lack of connection and her rather unsettled home life.

Things are difficult at home as the uncle she lives with (along with her Mum and auntie, cousin and grandmother) loses his job as a policeman. It's not a job he enjoys anyway, as he has to see things he can't describe to the ladies at home (presumably torture of left-wing revolutionaries and activists), but he is the main breadwinner in the household.

Suddenly Larita's dreams of university and getting to America seem stupid romantic fantasies to the rest of her family, and indeed to her revolutionary boyfriend Victor who wonders why she'd want to leave him and the Association just when things are getting interesting.

It's a classic tale of dreamy teenagers, passionate politics, poverty and survival, with some lovely observations on life threaded through it.

Hemingway is visible but out of reach. That is Hemingway himself, since he lives in the mansion up on the hill and he is seen from time to time, but never seems to be home when Larita needs his help.

But also Hemingway's novels, which Larita discovers via the most endearing character in the film, the guy who runs the local bookshop, but which her boyfriend Victor regards as romantic rubbish and a fantasy.

I loved the shots of the coastline in Havana, the Malecon. Especially as I have been there for one of my old jobs. What intrigued me even more was that this film was made three years even before I was there in 1993 so must have looked pretty similar to what I saw myself, even though supposedly set a few decades earlier. (After all, one of the beauties of Havana is the old buildings and cars, since nobody has had money to do terrible 'development' since the revolution in 1959).

I really enjoyed this film and was very glad I had timed my visit to the Westgarth to coincide with its start in the Latin American Film Festival 2018.

****

Leave no Trace

Seen at the Star Cinema in Eaglehawk VIC. And seen by Cecil alone as Bea is away :-(

Cecil says: I really liked this film about a father and daughter who live outside mainstream society, first in Oregon and then in Washington State. It’s actually a coming-of-age film, though not in the usual Hollywood way.

Tom, really well played by Thomasin McKenzie (did they give the character that name only after casting, I wonder?), is a resourceful teenager who is learning how to cover her tracks in the woods, how to pick and cook mushrooms and how to survive in the wild of the woods (though the film makes it seem far from wild, and actually extremely serene).

But as the film develops, you realise that she is in fact just following her Dad wherever he goes, and he is the more restless one. There’s a vague reference to the loss of his wife (she barely remembers her Mum), and lots of hints that Will (Ben Foster) has come back from some tour of duty with the armed services and suffers nightmares and probably PTSD as a result.

Tom actually quite likes some of the places they briefly stop in. She enjoys community, meeting others, and quickly settles before her dad wants to move on again.

The film is made with Tom as the central character. We learn more about her than about her Dad, and as they move on yet again, we as viewers share Tom’s frustration at her Dad’s need for constant movement.

I loved the shack community in Washington State, with the wonderful woman who keeps bees, and the older couple who sing lovely harmonies by the campfire.

It’s the side to America Bea and I loved when we lived there, even though we didn’t actually meet such marginal communities ourselves, but it showed that sense of community and togetherness that we did see a lot of, and it felt a million miles away from the America of Trump supporters we see more of on the TV usually.

I won’t spoil the ending for those who haven’t seen the film yet, but there’s something very mature about Tom in the final scenes, as she allows herself to feel emotions but takes a decision that goes with her heart.  

I found it very thought-provoking and atmospheric, peaceful and insightful. Not a rip-roaring tale, but a film very suited to my mood that sunny Sunday in October.

***.5

Mary Shelley

Seen at the Theatre Royal in Castlemaine, VIC

Cecil says: A second film in a day is a bit like having that second coffee in the morning: the second one has to be really top quality to be satisfying because the first one met the addictive need. 

Sadly, Mary Shelley just wasn’t quite good enough to warrant being our second film, and by the end I was wondering how long there was still left to go, and how many more extra bits they could add to the story.

I wasn’t alone in this, though. The woman next to us got her mobile phone out half way through and began reading stuff off it, much to my annoyance. She moved after a few minutes, but when I glanced back some time later, she was still in the cinema, on the back row and still on her phone.

So that’s at least two of us who thought Mary Shelley wasn’t as gripping as we had hoped.

I did get caught up a few times, and enjoyed learning about the connections between Shelley and Byron, Shelley and Wollstonecroft, and even to learn that Mary Shelley was with the poet Shelley and took his name. I must admit I hadn’t even known that beforehand.

But somehow it didn’t retain my attention. I found myself observing the action on the screen, wondering why this felt like a 6^th form end-of-year production (was it the hair, the look, the acting, the script?); wondering if it would have worked better as an 8-part TV drama? And wishing they’d just get on with producing Frankenstein!!

Byron was the worst, somehow. Felt a bit like someone trying to be Alan Rickman in Robin Hood. All evil and doing terrible deeds.

The process of writing was interesting. How an idea is born and how it takes on a concrete form with characters and plot developing as you experience things in life.

It was tragic how all these talented (if aimless) people died so young, and extraordinary that most of the things that happened to them happened in their teens. Maybe that’s why it felt like that 6^th form production. They were all supposed to be 6^th form age…

***

Bea says: A very interesting story, which despite having a degree in English Literature I knew precious little about - like Cecil I hadn't even realised that the "Shelley" in her name was from the poet Shelley, and certainly had no idea her mother was Mary Wollstonecraft! 

The story was strong enough for me to remain interested; but again, as Cecil says, it did rather feel like a 6th form play (I suspect the makeup and costume designers might have been young...).  Certainly made the whole Romantic poets thing look a lot less romantic; and didn't bear comparison with On Chesil Beach, which we had seen right before.

**

On Chesil Beach

Seen at the Theatre Royal, Castlemaine, VIC

Bea says: I was keen to see this after reading Ian McEwan's On Chesil Beach when it first came out in the late 2000s; and wondered how well they would deal with the theme of repressed sex in post war Britain.

I can certainly remember an interesting conversation with my father-in-law about it, who said the novel rather hit a nerve for him - only slightly older than the protagonists in the novel, and film. 

The story centres on Edward (Billy Howle) and Florence's (Saoirse Ronan) wedding night, and their lack of knowledge and experience of sex, leading to a (spoiler alert) disastrous experience and swift annulment of their marriage.  The novel is able to focus more on their internal dialogue and on the what-might-have-been; but the film manages to convey their youth, and the first signs of the beginning of the changing social system for post war generations, which Edward and Florence just slightly miss out on, and also, and most importantly that things tend to turn out ok in the long run, even if it wasn't what we thought would or should happen at the time. 

That was something I took from the book, and although I think the ending was embellished a bit in the film, it still came across, if with less of a light touch, and is what keeps this story from being depressing.

Loved the acting and direction.  Howle and Ronan both give excellent, understated performances and the director keeps it tight.  Not sure however if one could actually complete a long walk (or run) along Chesil Beach in ballet flats however...

***1/2

Cecil says: I actually enjoyed On Chesil Beach. I like period dramas, even if the ‘period’ is now inching its way into my lifetime, and this film’s last scenes are actually set in 2007. But seeing Chesil Beach on film was wonderfully evocative for me of exciting holidays as a child down on the Dorset coast.

The sea was calm for all the scenes shot in this film, but the sound of waves crashing over the pebbles, and that amazing shaped beach, which is so visible in the film, were favourites of mine as Young Cecil.

I really enjoyed the storyline too, with its awkward undertones of sexual frustrations, connections made but then lost, and the conventions of the early 60s, still holding people back before the Swinging years came along a short time later.

I’m sure there are plot weaknesses like the fact that He doesn’t know the difference between Baguette and Brioche, even though he got a First Class Honours in History and specialised in Versailles; and the rather over-dramatic break-up as a knee jerk reaction to a first row as a couple. 

Maybe I’m seeing things through 21^st century glasses, but – in contrast to films like Remains of the Day, admittedly set in earlier times, but where the social difficulties made things ‘impossible’ for the lovers – but did relationships really break down that easily over one bad night in bed??

The people we went with found the pace a bit slow and the mood lacking humour. But it didn’t bother me, and I was gripped all the way through.

The music was lovely, too, with more nice memories of attending concerts in Wigmore Hall in my London days.

I guess we don’t go to see films for the memories or the music, but they certainly kept me engaged through On Chesil Beach. I thought Saoirse Ronan was excellent as Florence; Billy Howle also believable as Edward. Other famous faces are Anne-Marie Duff and Emily Watson, as the two mothers, and both carry off their roles well, though Duff’s ‘brain damage’ is an interesting case.

My own Mum was hit by a train door like that and she too fell to the ground, though fortunately not with the dire consequences suffered by Duff’s character.

So overall I gave On Chesil Beach a thumbs up. I thought I had read the book but actually that’s one of Ian McEwan’s works I haven’t read. And some critics say the story is better told on the printed page. Well that’s as maybe.

 I still give this film ***.5

Edie

Seen at the Paramount Theatre, Maryborough VIC

Cecil says:  We went to see Edie because we quite fancied being transported over to the Scottish Highlands, which is where the film is largely set. And from that point of view, Edie was a great success, with much of it filmed in and around Lochinver, a place we know well and have fond memories of visiting in years gone by.

The idea of the story is also not bad: 83 year old woman, who was a bit of a wild child early in her life, but then lived through a controlling marriage and had to care for her not very nice sounding husband for some 30 years, is suddenly free when he dies one day.

This liberates Edie, very well played by Sheila Hancock by the way, to follow a dream of climbing a certain mountain up in the far NW of Scotland. So that basic premise is all very well, and could have made quite an interesting film, dotted through maybe with historical snippets of her wild youth with her Dad, and her subdued marriage.

But instead, we are taken through a rather implausible link-up with a young man who just keeps doing rather unlikely things. For starters, on Inverness railway station platform, he and his girlfriend knock Edie to the ground as they rush for their train, and that just felt very unbelievable knowing the width of those platforms and the small number of passengers on them…

But then, over and over, we have unlikely or caricatural scenes, like the night Edie gets taken to the local pub, and everyone is either really unfriendly, laughing at her, or even knocks her to the ground again as she is whirled across the dance floor. We have never ever been to a small Scottish town and found people behave like that, even at an incredibly busy New Years Eve ceilidh last year, in fact.

It made me wonder if the writer had ever actually spent much time in Scotland, so I looked for her name when the credits rolled at the end, and sure enough it Elizabeth O’Halloran is from the west coast of Ireland, not Scotland, and it made me wonder if her portrayal of small town Scotland was not actually more based on her knowledge of west coast Ireland (not that I know that area myself).

The relationship between Edie and Jonny doesn’t really work, and since this is central to the film itself, I’m afraid in that sense, the film itself doesn’t work.

Given how difficult the climb to the summit was, would he really have let an 83-year old go for it alone? When he did go up to find her after the rainstorm, mightn’t it have been more interesting to discuss why actually reaching the summit itself mattered so much, as the experience of even getting that far was achievement enough, wasn’t it?

The moment she gets there is backed by full orchestral soundtrack, presumably designed to overwhelm us with the emotions she must feel in that instant, but I found myself not being moved by this scene at all, and wondering why the tug of the heartstrings?

Oh and Jonny’s own relationship with his girlfriend just came across as false. I mean, so he wants to go up a hill to spend time with an old lady? Why should that matter? Would the entrepreneurial girlfriend really have been so upset at his ‘disloyalty’? It just came across as a mountain out of a molehill.

So, great scenery, some nice filming, and basic idea OK, but the plot and the dialogue pretty average, I’m afraid.

**.5, but ***.5 for the setting

Bea says: Great concept, beautifully filmed, but not well written.

On paper, this film really works, and on screen it gets a 2/3 - the idea is really good, and in our times of an increasing aged population surely very resonant too?  Cecil has summarised the plot, so I won't, but suffice to say this must be a very common experience for older women now; to have spent quite some years caring for an ill and/or disabled partner, coming out of a marriage that may or may not have been particularly fulfilling, and still with relative health and fitness.  

The idea of a journey of independence, of discovery, of tying up loose ends, is really workable.  However, perhaps it might have been better to get someone to write the script who had at least some insight into this situation, or who could place themselves in it, and/or who had some knowledge of Scottish culture. 

I am not Scottish, but have worked and lived there, and I winced a bit at the portrayal, as Scots are generally more friendly and much more thoughtful of others than the characters were portrayed.  On the way home, I said to Cecil that it felt like a first draft, but later Cecil did some research and told me it was at least the fourth or fifth draft of the script....It had potential, but needed a good editorial steer away from cliché and towards depth.

The filming was beautiful.  The Scottish Highlands tend to play themselves in any film they feature in, and this was no exception, but I particularly liked the sequence when Edie is walking and the quietness, and sounds and sights of the natural world are emphasised.  It's rare to see that kind of still, quiet, slow filming in any feature film, and I was lost in it.  The filming made the experience of seeing this film worthwhile to me.  

Don't go expecting any good dialogue or characterisation - go for the views and the filming.

**.5

The Breaker Upperers

Seen at the Paramount Theatre, Maryborough, VIC

Cecil says: The distributors of The Breaker Upperers did a good job advertising this film. They knew how to pick the best bits for the trailer, which got us to go and see it, as – we hoped – a light entertainment film on a cold Sunday morning. I wish they hadn’t.

This was awful.

I don’t even want to waste too much time explaining what was awful about it. Dreadfully written; stilted; jokes that felt more like Benny Hill or a sixth form drama production at high school. No, I’m being nice: a fourth form production.

I can’t think of any redeeming features, really. As soon as I saw Celia Pacquola on the doorstep overdoing the tears, I realised how much I dislike her acting and ‘comic’ style (she vaguely works on Rosehaven, but only against the wooden estate agent sidekick there).

The concept might have worked if better written. But it was over-acted, cliched and painfully NOT funny. Oh, and what the dance scene towards the end was all about, I have no idea. It really made me wonder who the target audience was: if Millennials, why lead with main characters who are old enough to be their Mums? If not Millennials, wtf?

Come on, New Zealand cinema. I know you can do better than this.

*

Bea says: Yes, clearly a case of all the best jokes were in the trailer...it's rare that I don't find any redeeming features in a film, but this had very few.  There were a handful of funny lines (which we had seen before).  But otherwise, despite the concept being quite good (the Breaker-Upperers can be hired to break up with your partner on your behalf), it was so poorly written - a 6th form class could probably have done better.  In fact, I mused to Cecil afterwards, it might have been originally conceived of for TV, as it did occasionally feel like a series of episodes strung together (not particularly well).  

The comedy was infantile and heavy handed; as a result just not funny.  It needed a far lighter touch, and dare I say better delivery.  You need a very, very good comic actor to work well with poor writing, and sadly I just don't think the cast were up to it.  Shortly after seeing this however, I noticed a NZ friend posting about it on Facebook - and she loved it, describing it as quintessential NZ comedy...perhaps a cultural gap?

* for the 5-6 funny lines.

The Bookshop

Seen at the Theatre Royal, Castlemaine, VIC

Cecil says: I had no idea what to expect from The Bookshop, except that I – correctly – assumed it would revolve around a book shop…

Funnily enough I realised as the voiceover began that I had been expecting a quaint American small town book shop and some story built around that. Just shows how ingrained our expectation of American culture is on our screens. But, no, The Bookshop is filmed mostly on location in Northern Ireland (we recognised some of the coastal scenes), and I was interested in how many of the credits rolling by at the end of the film seemed to be of Catalan origin (and sure enough, the film was written and directed by Isabel Coixet from Barcelona, and she involved lots of Catalan folk in the production – good for her, I say).

However, this says nothing about the film itself. The voiceover runs right through the film and I won’t do a spoiler on who the character turns out to be whose voice it is, but another surprise only a few seconds in was the appearance strolling into sight over the horizon of Bill Nighy. I had no idea he was in the film at all, but I knew Bea would be pleased, and if I was a betting man, I’d have a good chance of winnings if I bet on Bill Nighy appearing in pretty well every film we see these days.

The premise of the film: outsider comes into small village in (not totally clear what era – but since Lolita has just been published, it suggests 1950s) England with a desire to convert on old house into a bookshop. Against her is one of the local dignitaries, who has aspirations to have a local arts centre housed there; and at the first party the prospective bookshop owner attends, she gets fairly short shrift from most locals, who are either definitely in the Duchess’s camp or are clearly not interested in books.

So far it smacks a little of Vicar of Dibley. But there isn’t much humour here, and the pace is fairly slow. But the plot does develop nicely and relationship between Emily Mortimer (Florence Green) and Bill Nighy (Edmund Brundish) is rather nice to watch as it slowly develops, though never quite materialises, rather like in Remains of the Day.

Looking at the book industry today (not that I know much about it), it’s gratifying that there are still independent book shops doted around the place, and we always try to drop by on our travels. It can’t have been easy even in the 1950s to make a bookshop in a small village profitable, but it’s unimaginable now that such a bookshop – in a village that can’t have had that many inhabitants altogether – would take a gamble and order 200 copies of a new release like Lolita. Is there any book today which might sell like that?

***

Bea says: I am a life long book lover, and hence a bookshop lover, so any film that purports to be about either is onto a winner with me, and if it also has Bill Nighy in it – well even better.  You would think that would mean I would give this a 5 star rating, but actually the plot is a little slow, even for me and I am pretty tolerant of that, and I just didn’t feel I got enough inside the head of the main character to really embody the film – I watched the “action” (such as there was), rather than embodying it, so I felt a sense of distance.  I noted in the credits that it is adapted from a novel and I would now like to read the novel, to see if the sense of distance is the same.  I did like the neat ending, where we see the legacy of children being around books, bookshops and book lovers, and it did let me dream a little about running a small bookshop in a small town….

Overall recommended for book lovers everywhere, for a Sunday afternoon or cozy winters evening.

***1/2

All the Wild Hoirses

Seen at the Glasgow Film Theatre

Cecil says: We always try to get along to the GFT on visits to Glasgow and we had a free afternoon so chose this documentary about a 1,000km horserace in Mongolia as the best thing on the programme when we were free. Yes, it’s not an obvious choice and we probably wouldn’t have gone if we had lots of other options for good films at that time. But I’m glad we did.

So, the ‘horse race’ is basically an adventure holiday with a difference, only you need to be able to ride a (wild) horse to take part. It lasts about nine days, and every day each rider gets allotted a new horse to take them on the next leg through the wilds and the heat of Mongolia.

It’s beautifully filmed, though the focus is less on the Mongolian landscape and more on the characters who take part and how the challenge is approached differently by each rider’s different personality.

We have the driven lone Texan girl whose only goal is to win; there are the two Irish jump jockeys who want to win but also rather enjoy teaming up with a couple of the women riders; there’s the black South African horse whisperer, who is surely the favourite among all the film viewers for his magical patience with the more and more difficult rides he is given; and there are the cameo roles by the unfortunate Norwegian girl, the Dutch Alexander Technique teacher and various others who figured less prominently.

There’s heatstroke, broken bones, wolf attacks to battle against; and the nightly hospitality from local Mongolian families who house the riders at the end of each day.

It’s just a captivating insight into a kind of quirky adventure holiday (and surely good for business for the team who run the race each year), but also strangely compelling viewing. Funnily enough, I didn’t really care who won, and that I think is the point also; this is really an event where it’s the taking part that counts. Just pity the poor guy who broke his collar bone about 100m into the race on the first day…

***

Bea says: My sister joined us for this excursion to the GFT and, as we often do, we saw whatever was on at the time that suited us, rather than choosing a film and then going at that time.  There was a choice between this and one other, and we plumped for this, following lunch at the Willow Tea Rooms.  

My sister was sceptical, but in fact we all really enjoyed it.  It is documentary-style, and very absorbing.  Very quickly we were caught up in the logistical issues of organising such a race, the motivations of those taking part – from seasoned horsemen and women to people who just wanted to do something completely different to their usual daily grind – and the local Mongolians who hosted participants and provided the (often) challenging horses.  Following the key participants to the finish line (or not, in some cases) was great.

I was pleased to see the attention paid to horse welfare – which actually had quite an impact on finishing time – and the growth of collegiate bonding between the participants, as they helped each other through the challenges the terrain and conditions presented.  These were important details for me, which made the documentary much more human and intimate, making me really care about what happened to the people involved.

Lots of great views and scenes of traditional tents as well – if you love travel, this one is definitely recommended!

***1/2

Adrift

Seen at the Sun Theatre in Yarraville, VIC

Cecil says: The opening scene of Adrift is so like Robert Redford’s All is Lost that you could be mistaken for thinking they nicked the idea. In fact, the whole concept of Adrift is pretty similar to the Redford survival film – boat gets holed out in the middle of the ocean; how the hell do you get out of that alive?

The Redford film is really only about survival, though; it really only has RR in it from scene 1 to the end; you feel the loneliness and marvel at his creative skills in managing to get him and his wrecked boat to safety.

Adrift is as much to do with the relationship between the two main protagonists: the couple who agree to sail the boat across the Pacific from Tahiti to San Diego. And the focus is really on the young woman who has to manage the situation once the boat has been damaged in a storm.

Well in the amazingly beautiful Sun Theatre in Yarraville, the audience was certainly largely female (maybe also to do with the matinee timing), and there was a whole row of young women in front of us who were perhaps the target audience for the makers of Adrift. I wonder how they empathised and identified with the young American (Tammy) who is trying to get the boat to a safe place and not die in the process.

The film is set in 1983 and we discover at the end that it is based on a true story (not sure why they held that back to the final credits, and I don’t think it’s much of a spoiler for anyone who hasn’t yet seen the film). That got me realising that I had two memories of Tahiti myself: in 1968, so only 15 years before this film was set, my boat back from Australia docked outside Tahiti, and funnily enough we then went into the most terrifying tropical storm I can ever remember being in. The ship was pitched and rolled for hours and that was a big liner, so how a small yacht survived at all, I don’t know.

Then I flew in 1986 from Sydney to LA with a stop-off in Tahiti, and I can remember a guy next to me on the plane had plans to stop off and get work as crew on a boat, so that kind of thing did happen.

As a survival film, I preferred Redford’s. But as an observation on relationships, dreams, hallucinations even, as well as survival, Adrift was a good watch.

And wow the Sun Theatre is amazing.

***

Bea says: I really enjoyed this outing to the historic Sun theatre in Yarraville.  I found the film compelling, in that "what would I have done in her situation" kind of way that survival films have (I did not see the similar Robert Redford film with Cecil).  I very, very vaguely remembered the true story this film is based on from the early eighties (my memory was triggered by the footage of magazine and weekend supplement features at the end), but because my memory was vague the twist in the plot came as a complete surprise to me.

I did very much enjoy watching a film solely about a woman, with her experiences being completely central to the plot.  We so rarely see this.  And she was portrayed as strong and capable - I hoped the row of young millennial women in front of us would have found her inspiring - I did, and I was glad to read that she still sails regularly, in the closing summary of "what happened after".  The film is quite sad, and not entirely uplifting, but very absorbing and I would recommend it.

***

Phantom Thread

Seen at the Star Cinema, Eaglehawk

Cecil says: Phantom Thread is supposedly Daniel Day-Lewis's last film, so it felt like a time to reflect a bit on him as an actor. And what's funny is that, although he was amazingly good again in this film, where he's the control freakery tailor designing dresses for the uber rich of the 1950s, neither of us could remember other films we'd seen him in, except for Room with a View, where Cecil remains one of our most loved characters on film.

The thing about Day-Lewis is that he is a method actor, getting totally into role, living the life of his character before filming begins. I remember an article about him preparing to play the role of a boxer and sparring with a professional boxing champ to get into the experience. I never saw that film, and as I say I can't remember other films he's been in, but maybe that's because he becomes the character rather than staying in the mind as Daniel Day-Lewis. And if Cecil in Room with a View is the exception to that, maybe Cecil IS Daniel Day-Lewis, or vice-versa…I guess we'll never know.

So to Phantom Thread. This is all about the relationship between Reynolds (DDL) and Alma (Vicky Krieps, an actress I didn't know before, but who did a great job as counterweight to Reynolds) Neither character is especially likeable and both seem very driven, so it feels as if it can't possibly end well really, especially with Cyril (Lesley Manville), who I just learnt in writing this review is Reynolds' sister, gatekeeping and mentoring all in one.

The dress-making is superb, though the Society crowd they are designing for are an unattractive lot. And deep down, Reynolds cares nothing for them. His reaction to one monied lady who collapses drunk in one of his finest dresses is pretty horrible, though. As are many of his reactions to things Alma does and noises Alma makes etc. But then Alma too is somehow troubled and controlling. She works behind the scenes to get what she wants out of the relationship, even while saying to her confessor that she has given herself totally to Reynolds.

I'm glad we saw Phantom Thread before it left the cinema circuit. We watched it in the amazing Star Cinema in Eaglehawk, which is set up with sofas and armchairs only in an old town hall building. That set-up gives a real lounge room feel, which can work both ways, as the couple next to us at first clearly chatter their way through films at home, and continued to do so in the Star. We moved a few seats away to get ourselves out of earshot.

***

Bea says: Highly disturbing.  I like Day-Lewis, history, and I am a keen crafter, so thought I would love this period film about sewing and couture.  And I liked some aspects of it, but I didn’t like any of the characters very much, and that made it hard to invest in the film.  Reynolds is cold and controlling, Vicky is bordering on psychopathic, and Cyril is remote and unpredictable.  It was well done – beautifully made, exquisite costuming (although I thought I saw some puckers that wouldn’t be in such a bespoke garment?  Maybe I imagined them), fantastic performances and well written.  But it left me cold; cold, clinical and too perfect is how I would describe this film, to its detriment, unless that was the aim (and I suspect it was).

***1/2

Film Stars Don't Die in Liverpool

Seen at the Theatre Royal, Castlemaine

Cecil says: We didn’t know what to expect from Film Stars Don’t Die in Liverpool. The last time we had seen a film with a British city in the title was Manchester by the Sea, and it was neither set in England nor very uplifting. Not that Film Stars is uplifting, but once we saw in the opening credits that it starred Julie Walters and Jamie Bell, we guessed it may well be set in northern England this time.

The opening scene has Annette Bening in her theatre dressing room, as Gloria Grahame, preparing to go on stage in The Glass Menagerie. We are quickly placed into context as she puts a cassette into the player (has to be 70s or 80s then) and Elton John’s Song for Guy starts to play, so that narrowed it down to post 1978.

More from the opening scenes set the stage: Gloria is preparing her makeup and hair ahead of the performance. We see her age, which is one of the key themes of the film (what does happen to ‘ageing’ film stars, though ageing is a relative thing since I am actually older than the Gloria Grahame portrayed, and Bening is superbly well-cast, as she is only a year younger than Grahame would have been at the time). And we see her collapse on the floor just after her five minute curtain call. Sickness is the other theme that runs through this: how we deal with it, how we hide it from loved ones, and how we prioritise things in our lives due to illness.

Bell and Walters are superb, teaming up in performances that echoed their fantastic time in Billy Elliot. Bell gets to do some more dancing, only this time with Bening, and there are scenes just like in Billy Elliot down narrow back alleys and in terraced streets, only this time time they are in Liverpool rather than Newcastle.

I loved how true to real life in 1979-81 this film felt. It made me aware of having lived through that time as a uni student, with some things very familiar (price of a pint, wallpaper patterns) and others less so (The lack of cars parked in the streets in those days when ownership was probably less than one car per household, compared to the multi-vehicle homes of today).

Seeing the posters of the Liverpool Labour Party back then (and how this pre-dates Derek Hatton) reminded me of my own early activist years, and for some reason I had a vivid memory of walking home from election night in Brighton, somehow conscious that Thatcher’s victory would change the world I lived in.

Bell and Bening’s romance is both believable and extraordinary at the same time. What would a 28 year old man be doing with a woman twice his age, but Bell carries it off well, as does Bening, as she copes with fading stardom and what she fears are fading looks.

But talking of ageing actresses, Vanessa Redgrave also pops up for one scene as Grahame’s Mum. And as she always seems to do, she just stood out for her fantastic voice in the few lines she had in this film.

The film is not uplifting, but it is fun in places. It is dark and it is light. It’s really as close to real life as you can get, I guess. And maybe that’s why I enjoyed it.

****

Bea says: I knew nothing at all of this film prior to seeing (something that usually pays off, I find) and I really enjoyed this bittersweet and unusual love story.  I liked that it was between an older woman and younger man (rarely addressed), and that it was based on truth.  I also enjoyed the settings of 1970s/80s Liverpool (particularly the scene where people just stood about on the street - no one does that now), and of LA and the incredible contrast it would have been to a young person from Liverpool at the time.  It is several weeks since we have seen it now, and many, many scenes have been returning to me; dinner in Gloria's little transportable house on the beach in LA, dancing in the Hampstead flat, reading Romeo and Juliet to an empty theatre but so meaningful.  Superbly written, never overdone or overplayed by the wonderful cast.  A pleasure, as good stories should be, even when they don't follow the usual formulas.

****

The Death of Stalin

Seen at the Theatre Royal, Castlemaine, VIC

Cecil says: 

I just caught The Death of Stalin before its run finished at Castlemaine’s Theatre Royal, and I sat with friends on the sofas downstairs for the first time (though without Bea this time, sadly).

I heard mixed things about the film, but I have to say I liked it. I’m not a big fan of Armando Iannucci and found his political TV satires to be too cynical – I even saw him once at a Q&A at the Ritzy in Brixton and wanted to walk out, I disliked him so much, but was caught in the middle of the cinema that day and was stuck. Funnily enough, one couple did walk out in the middle of The Death of Stalin, for whatever reason…

I actually liked its quirky mix of personality minutiae, making it almost farcical or absurd at times (but, you know, it MUST be yukky to have to kneel in someone’s piss if you’re wearing your best suit, and I’m sure those pall bearers at funerals do have dodgy moments where they think they’re about to drop the coffin…), with the gloomy and sinister political developments as Stalin’s reign of terror comes to an end, only to be – apparently – followed almost immediately by an equally sinister regime under Beria.

I didn’t know much about Beria, to be honest, except as a Stalin thug, though some of the other personalities were familiar of course: Molotov, Khrushchev, even Zhukov. Funnily enough, I was just discussing with the friends before the film started what was the sequence of Soviet leaders, and none of us recalled who led the country between Stalin and Khrushchev – well, watch this film, and  learn.

The casting worked well for me, too. I’m not sure how American audiences will react to a cockney Stalin, or precious English-sounding Beria, but they’ll relate to Steve Buscemi’s Khrushchev, I’m sure.

Most poignant scene: the line-up of prisoners being summarily shot one by one, until the order comes through to stop the shooting, with no explanation, and we focus for a moment on the next guy in the line, whose life was so randomly saved.

What a turbulent time this must have been, and all of it a mere 36 years after the biggest upheaval of them all, with the 1917 revolution. Thinking in contemporary terms, that means looking back to 1982, and the Falklands might seem a long time ago, but it is within living memory very easily for someone of my age. So Russia went through so much in those years.

I was also remembering our encounter in Tbilisi with the family whose grandparents had served the teenage Stalin when he was sent to buy the family’s weekly supply of wine and tea (bourgeois lot, they were, apparently). None of this film was set in Georgia, but still it brought back happy memories yet again of our epic overland trip to Australia…

I was also reminded of a politics lecture I attended in 1983 at the Sorbonne, when the lecturer mentioned Stalin dying on 5 March 1953. I remember thinking: why do we need to learn such exact dates, especially when a student regurgitated the exact date a few days later. Surely it’s enough to know 1953? But then, having learnt that date at uni all those years ago, I was struck by how little snow there was on the ground in ‘Moscow’ for the start of March. Hey, but allow the film-makers a bit of dramatic licence, huh?

So well done, Iannucci. With The Death of Stalin, you have won be back as a fan.

***

Mary Magdalene

Seen at the beautiful Regent Cinema in Ballarat

Bea says: This film was striking in its simple beauty.  The lives of Jesus and the disciples were simple, with few if any possessions and little money.  Clothing was plain and serviceable, with few changes of garments, a blanket worn over the shoulder which doubled as something for sleeping, and the only decoration being beautiful embroidery.  Indeed, there is a special scene where Mary (Rooney Mara) gets a newly embroidered dress to wear when her intended husband comes for dinner, but when Mary leaves home to follow Jesus (Joaquin Phoenix) she takes nothing but her blanket.  Everyone looks exactly like they did in my copy of the Children’s Bible, but with beautiful cinematography.\

The pace was also simple – slow, with frequent long silences.  Afterwards, Cecil and I thought that it would have reflected the pace of life then, without so many things to distract.  Walking in the wilderness to get from place to place, hearing only the sound of birds, for example.  Very different from rushing out of the house, trying to remember everything, getting into a car or onto a train, checking email, etc etc.

I have some knowledge of the story, but not, it turned out, full knowledge.  I did not know that Mary was actually from Magdalene (hence her name; I had just thought it was her name); I did not actually know that she had travelled extensively with Jesus and the disciples, that she baptised people (particularly women), or that she was first to spread the news of Jesus’ resurrection.  I knew that her reputation as a fallen woman was disputed, and I was also aware of the various Dan Brown-esque ideas about her having Jesus’ child and so on.  This film aims to present Mary as a kind of 13^th disciple, or “apostle of apostles” which apparently the Vatican now recognises her as, and it is refreshing to see her life interpreted this way rather than the usual rather sexualised and misogynistic view of her that has been presented over the years.  The film also showcases the politics of religion that the disciples fell in to quite well.

The film tries to follow Mary’s experience so skips over some key events in the lead up to the crucifixion – Pontius Pilate doesn’t appear, Peter (or is it Paul?) doesn’t deny Jesus, we don’t see any conversions happening on the crosses and the 40 days in the wilderness is only vaguely alluded to, but as my knowledge of the story is primarily based on King of Kings, Ben Hur and the previously mentioned Children’s Bible, I can’t attest as to the accuracy of any of this.  Plenty of things do make it in – Judas, the thieves in the temple, for example.

The film’s beauty has stayed with me, and it was seasonally appropriate as well.  My only criticism would be that Mary had rather lovely pale skin for someone who lived a rough subsistence life in Judea at that time….Otherwise, recommended as an interesting take on a well-known story.

***1/2

Cecil says: Bea is right of course about Rooney Mara’s pale skin being rather unlikely in the harsh glare of constant sun and an outdoor life, as she would have had both before her time as the 13th apostle and even in the more sheltered home life before.

Having said that, there was something captivating about her face. We are briefly in the position of the sick or disabled to whom Mary comes to relieve of suffering and it did remind me of my own hospital visit 20 odd years ago when I woke from general anaesthetic to find the face of a nurse right next to my face, saying something like ‘hello’. That felt powerful enough, so it is easy to imagine the immensity of someone like Mary suddenly appearing in your life when you are someone society has given up on; I can imagine many a conversion happened on the back of that.

The producers of Mary Magdalene the film chose their set well. It wasn’t filmed anywhere near Jerusalem, but having been there and to Jordan and the Occupied Territories, I can attest to the fact that it did bring back memories of my momentous few weeks there over 30 years ago now (funnily enough, linking back to the nurse and surgery experience, since I injured my back trying to do a breaststroke kick in the salty Dead Sea, and that started the whole journey, which I feel I am still on today, really).

I don’t know the Biblical tales as well as Bea, but I did think Judas comes across as rather a sympathetic character in this film. A zealot, maybe, but if he was the one who betrayed Jesus, there was no sign in this film of payment to Judas, and we are left with the impression that he acted because he felt this might precipitate society’s move towards the Promised Land.

Mary Magdalene is certainly slow paced, but as Bea says, this felt right for the time and place it was depicting.

***

Sweet Country

Seen at Castlemaine's wonderful Theatre Royal

Bea says: About half an hour in, I had an urge to run away from this film.  I had a sense of foreboding an absolutely nothing, nothing good was going to happen, I knew it.  But I told myself, I had to sit it out, and see it through.  It is my country's history, and it's shame.

So I stayed with it, and watched it, and it was bad (in terms of my sense of foreboding, not the film), but not all bad.  Sam and his wife evade the party hunting them down, and could have continued to if circumstances had been different.  Justice is served, and Sam is found to have been acting in self defence, with no case to answer.  I won't say any more about the plot as even this spoils enough.

Sam Neill is back to getting some good parts these days, and is fantastic as the good egg religious landowner.  Bryan Brown plays a complex character (the sergeant) well.  Great performances from all others; and the "Western" style filming and beautiful country are well done.  I am not enough of a student of the Western genre (although I have seen many of them) to have picked all the references.  The Johny Cash song over the closing credits I am sure is one of them. 

A  must-see.  The closing line from Sam Neill gives pause for thought.

****

Cecil says: Not a film I'd recommend if you need your spirits lifting. The sense of foreboding doesn't take long to take hold; in fact already in the opening scene, which just shows us some boiling water on a campfire, and a guy adding coffee (?) and sugar, while in the background you hear the noise of someone being beaten up by a nasty racist.

Sam Neill and Bryan Brown, those old stalwarts of Australian cinema, are brilliant as ever: Neill as the gentle, religious farmer who treats Aboriginals as equals; Brown as the obsessive sergeant determined to track down the fugitive Sam Kelly, who has shot the awful March.

It's something of a relief when March does get his comeuppance fairly early in the film, though by then the viewer has been put through some of the horrifying deeds and attitudes of 'white fellahs' that must have been so common back then.

Sam Neill's last line in the film does make you reflect on where Australia is at today. The judge is clearly a new generation urban type, probably up from Sydney or Melbourne. And to some extent Australia is still divided between city and country, though the country town we have chosen to live in is probably among the more progressive in Australia. But those attitudes we see from the white fellahs through most of 'Sweet Country' have probably not changed that much in some of the more remote outback towns even today.

Hamilton Morris as Sam Kelly shows great wisdom throughout plus a fantastic ability to survive in the tough outback. Archie reminded me of those Native American trackers who helped the whites in America catch up with Injuns. And Philomac is an interesting character: I quickly suspected that he might be Kennedy's son, but his survival instinct is also extraordinary, with a scary last line from him at the end of the movie. (clever casting, too, with maybe two brothers playing him as he gets older, or in flashback scenes?)

Funny coincidence that Philomac might be the son of someone called Kennedy. Because the shooting at the end, with the blood spurting over the wife in the carriage, is surely a reminder of what happened to JFK some 50 years later (though it's also a bit hard to know when the film was set, or which British Army action March and the Sergeant are supposed to have fought in).

Beautifully filmed, you could almost touch the sand and dust, and I almost began waving those flies away from my face even though there were none in the lovely old Theatre Royal in Castlemaine.

***