Meeting Gorbachev

Seen at the Glasgow Film Theatre

Cecil says: I don't know whether it's because I saw this film on my own, without Bea to bounce thoughts off afterwards, but I felt very thoughtful after seeing this film; it made me reflect on where we are in the world and whether I could have done more to play my own part in the direction the world has taken.

Watching someone like Gorbachev and seeing the story of his life from very ordinary and fairly rural beginnings to negotiating peace deals with the US President and then overseeing the break-up of the Soviet Union, made me reflect with sadness above all at the leaders we have today.

To think that we are left with the likes of Putin, Johnson, Xi Jinping, Johnson, Morrison (FFS!!), Trump (I only leave him last because I think for once he deserves to be at the bottom of a list) is such a sad reflection of the direction we have taken since the late 80s and early 90s.

It was very moving to see how the loss of his wife so bore into the soul of Gorbachev. That more than his own political downfall seem to leave him deeply saddened and lost, though it was also amusing to hear him reflect on Yeltsin ("should have banished him to Siberia") and his opportunistic power-grab which led to the USSR falling apart.

I love Herzog's films anyway, and although his questions (and occasional commentary) are secondary to the Gorbachev narrative, the film would not be the same without Herzog's imprint.

I left the cinema thinking of that desperate line from The Year of Living Dangerously (which apparently quotes Tolstoy paraphrasing something from Luke in the Bible): "What then must we do?"

****

Van Gogh & Japan

Seen at the Kyabram Theatre, Victoria

Bea says: Having really enjoyed our last Exhibition on Screen (Claude Monet), we were delighted to find this on at the historic Kyabram cinema in regional Victoria on a Sunday afternoon. 

We travelled out there in the car, attempted to find somewhere to have lunch (not easy on a Sunday in a small town), had to forgo our afternoon cuppa for a Cornetto in the cinema, but joined about 15 others to feast our eyes and ears.  
I knew about some aspects of Van Gogh's life prior to this, but not about his interest in Japan and how it influenced his work, so there was quite a bit of new information for me. 

I also didn't know about the circumstances of his death, so that was also new.  Beautiful cinematography and the hypnotic reading of letters made this, as with our last Exhibition, a relaxing and totally absorbing, experience.

The entire series is highly recommended.

****

Cecil says: I love the way the Exhibition on Screen series allows you to enter the world (and even partly enter the mind) of the artists they portray.

I was less interested in how Japanese art influenced Van Gogh than in the general narrative about the life of this brilliant, but rather unbalanced artist.

I find it hard to relate to someone who is so influenced by a distant culture, but never had any interest in trying to travel over to see things for himself, so that was one of the most striking lines we heard from his correspondence narrated through this film.

I was fascinated by his close but volatile relationship with Gauguin, the guy he was with when he did the famous ear-cutting act in a frenzy of anger and passion. Apparently Gauguin wrote a diary with the only first-hand recounting of this episode, and I know the idea of the Exhibition series is to hear the voice of the artist through their correspondence and writings, but it would have been powerful to hear Gauguin's account narrated here too.

I had no idea Van Gogh lived in Arles for an extended period - something I wish I'd known when I visited. And nor did I know that he and his brother (another intriguing relationship the film mentioned but made me want to explore more) are both buried in a town (suburb?) very close to Paris.

I wonder what else we'll get to see from the wonderful Exhibition on Screen series down here in country Australia?

***

Journey to a Mother's Room

Seen at the Forum Theatre, Melbourne, as part of MIFF 2019

Bea says: We saw this as part of the wonderful Melbourne International Film Festival, at the Forum Theatre.  

The film is the exploration of the relationship between a fairly recently bereaved woman and her young adult daughter.  We follow both their transformations out of this time of grief - the daughter's failed attempt to follow her mother's footsteps at the local textile factory before trying her luck as a nanny in London, and the mother's slow recovery of her skills, meaning and purpose as she is commissioned to sew the costumes for a dance troupe. 

 Their journeys are not equally paced which is what made this film interesting for me, and at times the daughter strides ahead, only to have a a disappointment and return home to find her mother has rebuilt a bit more of her life successfully.

Really quite a lovely story of mother-daughter relationships, leaving home and dealing with loss.

Recommended.

***.5

Cecil says: I was less drawn into this film than Bea, but I loved the venue and was transfixed by the decor of this extraordinary theatre even while the film's slow pace lost me at times.

Films about dealing with grief are never going to be lively, uplifting stories, and I think the scenes in the apartment reminded me too strongly of some of my depressed moments when I lived in a very similar flat in Pamplona in Spain when I got my first job after leaving Uni. There's something about Spanish furniture which weighs down on me for some reason.

***

Julia Blue

Seen at the Glasgow Contemporary Arts Centre during the Glasgow Film Festival

Cecil says: We wanted to see Julia Blue partly because we had planned to travel through Ukraine in 2014 on our overland journey to Australia, but had to cancel because of what was happening in the Crimea and the east of the country. But I also always like the drama genre when it involves a journalist at work in places that have hit the news – it’s the kind of film like The Year of Living Dangerously, that used to inspire me to be a journalist one day myself.

It also happened to fit in with our schedule in Glasgow so we could go straight to this film from another morning screening earlier.

It was great to see a Ukrainian perspective on things, especially as the country has been out of the news in the West lately, but the Troubles are still ongoing. Having said that, this was very much a coming-of-age film with Ukraine really the context rather than the subject-matter for the film.

Budding photo-journalist Julia helps out at a rehab hospital for men wounded in the war, and there she meets and falls for a guy from Donetsk. The film is a sweet portrayal of developing romance, where Julia is the main focus, she has girly catch-ups with a fellow student, a boy back in her village who fell in love with her years before, and her application to go to Germany for a full-on photo-journalism degree.

She has a big decision to make, tossing up between her romance and her career. It’s the classic dilemma nearly all 20 year olds come up against, so brought back memories of my own conflicts over such things back in the 80s.

But it resonated for me also because of so many reminders of things we saw when doing that overland journey to Australia. The pot-holed roads reminded me of Uzbekistan; the buses and taxis were reminiscent of the same in Romania or Georgia; the buildings could have been anywhere we visited in the ex-Soviet Union; and the family dinner in the rural village reminded me of our own invitation to a family in Azerbaijan.

I couldn’t help noticing that the ‘parents’ looked so old, but were probably actually younger than I am even now, but that can be as much to do with clothes and hairstyle as it is actual ageing.

So I enjoyed this film as much for the memories and thoughts it provoked in me as for its actual content. Having said that, it did make me think that coming-of-age movies were few and far between when I was coming of age myself. I can only really think of American Graffiti, as being contemporary to my life, though I didn’t even drive at the time and had none of those tribal things that were depicted in that 1970s classic.

No, I liked Julia Blue, and it was nice that the producer and director were there for a chat afterwards in the bar. They did really well with crowdfunding for this film, as the credits showed at the end. I wish there were more films like this on the circuit, too.

***.5

Bea says: An altogether very nice film about a young woman in her twenties breaking away from tradition and expectations (her friend's marriage symbolising that very strongly indeed) and forging her own, more adventurous path.

Like Cecil, I enjoyed the scenery and reminders of our own travels through that part of the world, but this film also gave me pause for thought about some of the conflict-ridden times of recent history - in our part of the world this kind of storyline (help out at a military hospital, meet an injured soldier) belongs to WW2 period films, perhaps occasionally to Vietnam or maybe Afghanistan (don't think I know of any though), but for many parts of the world this is very current to a young person's experience.  This is why it is important to see international films...\

***.5

Girl

Seen at the Glasgow Film Theatre during the Glasgow Film Festival 2019

Cecil says: Girl is an extraordinary film on so many levels. It’s the story of a few months in the life of a teenage transgender girl who is training to be a ballerina. We go through the struggles this involves on both journeys: dealing with the transition from boy to girl and the physical ordeal any young person has to put themselves through to make the grade as a ballet dancer.

Actually the gender journey is already done for the Girl Lara. She is a girl as far as we can see, and we never think of her as a boy at all, but we live through her medical appointments, her therapy sessions and her treatments as the system helps her body to change, though it’s never quick enough for the teenager who just wants to get there now.

The dance school scenes, with the punishing schedule and the amazing contortions her body has to go through, not to mention her poor feet – bloodied by countless pointe steps - are almost the more exhausting to watch. So intense and so difficult. And as one of the teachers says, the other girls have an advantage in starting to dance at a much earlier age, and doing the pointe walks from age 12, whereas Lara is starting from scratch at 15.

And then there are the struggles of just being an adolescent, no matter what your gender. The scene when the other dance school girls gang up on Lara is heart-breaking (though Bea says that all teenage girls at some point will be ganged up on, for whatever reason – it just happens to be Lara’s birth gender which is the focal point in this case).

The scenes where Lara is getting medical advice and therapy felt much more realistic than the recent Channel 4 TV series Butterfly, where the Mum reacted rather dramatically to an initial No from the Clinic and took her daughter off to America for (very expensive) treatment. I actually don’t believe there would be such a focus on surgery so early in most people’s journey as they indicate for Lara, but other than that, the depiction of the treatment process felt quite genuine to me.

I can imagine some trans activists getting annoyed that Lara was not played by a transgender actor. But Victor Polster was fantastic in the role, and as we found later in a Google search of the casting process, the producers wanted a lead actor who could dance at this level, which is no mean feat. It is only a really good dancer who can go from the wooden moves of the opening lessons to the grace and skills of Lara’s dancing later in the film. Apparently 500 people auditioned for the role, including 7 trans actors, but none of them was a good enough dancer. So they had to go to dance schools to find the right person to play the role.

There were fine performances also from Lara’s father (Arieh Worthalter), and even her little brother – played by Oliver Bodart - had a very moving scene where he reacts badly to being taunted for having a trans sister.

One thing I did think was that Lara was very lucky to have support from every single member of her family. That would have been a probable third battle ground in Lara’s life because there would always be an old uncle or cousin who didn’t accept her transition, but maybe that would have complicated the plot too much to add that level as well.

The self-harming scene was awful to watch but also superbly well-acted, both by Polster, and by Worthalter in his response.

So, Girl is an amazing movie. It is very intense, but with long periods of silence too (long enough for my rumbling stomach to be audible for anyone in the seats nearby, I reckon). Very thought-provoking, but beautiful too.

****

Bea says: I really enjoyed this sensitive handling of the very common (at the moment) transgender theme; although in many ways for me this film is really about the growing pains of adolescence with transgender being an additional dimension.  

Lara is adjusting to a new school which has the added complication of being a performing arts school, to a new town, and she is navigating her way to adult life roles as a dancer and in her family.  

She is very quiet as a character, perhaps painfully shy and struggles to speak to anyone.  The film follows her life intimately and so we get an insight into her struggles which her family, teachers and therapists do not, which actually felt to me like a real privilege. 

 The final scene, a few years in Lara's future, brought hope and joy.

Highly recommended, atlhough some scenes are hard to watch.

****

Mary Queen of Scots

Seen at the Showcase Cinemas in Paisley (Scotland)

Cecil says: Mary Queen of Scots has a dark feel to it. We saw it on a gloomy damp day in Scotland, and many of the scenes were set in similar circumstances although hundreds of years ago, but above all these were dark times, when a view expressed out of place, or a belief that didn’t chime with those in charge could mean losing your head, literally. And of course, Mary ultimately did just that.

It’s a striking film in that the two main characters are both women – in a period when women didn’t traditionally hold power – and both Saoirse Ronan (Mary) and Margot Robbie (Elizabeth) are magnificent in their roles. Of course, ultimately, you get the sense of male power pulling the strings and scheming for their own positions of influence, and it could be argued that the men scheming around Mary is what led to her downfall.

Mary is a character talked of a lot even today, and I can remember when we lived in North Yorkshire that various places we visited laid claim to being places of refuge for her when she was on the run from Scotland. I had to look up after the film to work out some of the historical detail – such as how she reckoned she had a better claim to the English throne than Liz (basically because Catholics didn’t recognise marriage after a divorce and therefore didn’t recognise offspring from such marriages).

I was also made to reflect on the ravages of small pox (Mary got lucky with her episode; Elizabeth less so, and the film shows all too starkly how the pox pock-marked Elizabeth’s complexion for years to come afterwards).

I personally don’t care about historical accuracy in movies like this: I believe the meeting between Mary and Elizabeth was fictitious, but actually great cinema, with the dance-like scenes as the two of them gradually got closer to seeing each other through the hanging laundry sheets.

The scenery was epic of course, set in beautiful Highland Scotland. And the performances all round were superb.

But the film didn’t leave me with any positive feelings or sense of justice done (or undone). None of the characters really came across sympathetically enough for me to identify with them, or to care overly what happened to them.

Both monarchs were headstrong and arrogant, as I guess monarchs needed to be back then to survive, and the lackies around them came across as just self-serving and ambitious. The only character I felt any actual sympathy for was the effeminate Rizzo, who ends up being dragged off to a gruesome death just because Mary was being undermined at that particular juncture in proceedings.

I would – and maybe should – give this film four stars, but for the mood it left me in (dark and brooding), I can only give it 3.5 stars.

***.5

Bea says: I was keen to see this as Cecil and I move between Australia and Scotland at present, and as I was educated in Australia my knowledge of the monarchy of Scotland and England is based on films and TV series (although there have been quite a few of those).  As a result I can't vouch for the historical accuracy at all, but I did enjoy a film about a time in history where two women were running the two countries 

Despite their differences, bitterness and rivalry, I liked how this film portrayed this responsibility as bringing them together.  I was aware from previous films/series that there was a lot of intrigue around the thrones and that Mary's choice of husband was perhaps not ideal, so those aspects of the story were familiar to me.

We saw this on a dark, cold February day and it was dark and cold on screen too.  Very apt and it set the mood well, although was not uplifting at all.

After watching, I decided a goal (now perhaps for 2020) would be to read one of the many good histories of Mary and Elizabeth available.

**** 

The Mule

Seen at the lovely Rex Theatre, Charlton (Victoria)

Cecil says: We went to see The Mule because that’s what was on at the lovely old Rex Theatre in Charlton, Victoria. I love this sort of community cinema, run by the people of Charlton, with just three screenings a week, so it was a shame to see only about 20 bums on the 400 or so seats, especially with a beautiful grand piano on the stage before the film and a pianist picking out some tunes to create a great atmosphere ahead of the movie.

This was Clint Eastwood’s latest offering. Boy, he’s getting on now and he plays a 90 year old retired day lily horticulturalist Earl Stone, who gets involved in drug running, when he needs some cash after the banks foreclose on his property.

There’s a sense that there is a lot about Eastwood himself in the storyline. When work or a hobby is all-consuming and family comes second through the decades, there comes a point when regrets start to pile up and a need to reconcile as life comes towards its final straight.

For a film involving Mexican drug cartels and police busts, there is surprisingly little violence and gun fire on screen, so although as with any drug-related film, there is an increasing sense of foreboding as Stone gets nearer and nearer to being caught, it’s not one of those films where you shudder at the blood and gore or the easy use of firepower to resolve conflict.

That said, it is still a very male film. Women don’t get much of a look-in, except perhaps the ex-wife, who also somehow didn’t come across as very real – I begin to wonder if Eastwood has ever created a female character that shows he really gets women. If his ex-wife held a candle for him all these years, surely there would have been more contact and she wouldn’t have just walked out like she apparently did all those years ago.

And then there is the slightly weird scene where 90 year old Stone hires in two young prostitutes for his motel room; it’s a brief scene, but somehow felt like an Eastwood fantasy being played out, along with his antics with the girls at the Mexican cartel party at another point.

It’s really well filmed, though, and keeps the audience interested, with a good storyline running through it. And it was quite nice to read that it was based on the true story of a WW2 vet in the 1980s who got involved in drug-running for the Mexican cartels. It would be interesting to know how much of the character is based on the true Mule and how much on Eastwood, given what I have said in this review about it feeling like it being a lot about Clint. Did he relate to this guy? Or did he just embellish the story to fit with his own life story?

***

Bea says: I was a bit reluctant to see this and only went because of its location as we really wanted to visit the Charlton cinema and this was what was showing there on the day we could go.  Although generally in my experience, Eastwood films are usually worth a watch, so I gave it a go.

Actually I quite enjoyed it  I liked the story a lot - the premise of a pretty straight old guy in the word of drug running and cartels was great, and gave me quite a few chuckles.  I also liked Stone's stoic approach to eventually being caught and imprisoned - a good life lesson in taking one's just desserts.

Down sides - few really, except for its woeful potential scoring on the Bechtel test....

Very diverting.  Recommended if you have time to kill; would be a good one to watch with with older relatives too.

***.5

The Keeper

Seen at the wonderful Balwyn Theatre in Melbourne

Cecil says: I knew I’d enjoy The Keeper, and I wasn’t at all disappointed. In fact, it’s the kind of film I could probably see five times and still not tire of it. A really lovely cinematic experience at the really lovely art deco Balwyn Theatre in Melbourne.

So Bert Trautmann had stopped playing by the time I got into football at the tender age of 7, but I realise now that he had only just retired, and in fact was still managing teams in England at that point. 

His story was well enough known, though, for me to have the basics from my childhood education: German POW stays in England, gets a break into football at the highest level, and plays a Cup Final at Wembley where he breaks his neck but heroically (and with a massive dose of good luck) carries on playing.

I even didn’t remember that he played for Manchester City, but clearly if you are a Man City fan, he is a bit of an icon, and amazingly even down in the heart of Melbourne, 10,000 miles away from MCR, there are fans who came to see The Keeper, as a father/son duo in the front row were decked out in full Man City gear. I shook their hand at the end of the film!

How a film begins is so important to set the tone, I think. And I loved the opening scenes of The Keeper: first scene was of a wartime dance floor in northern England; lots of lively jivers who have to stop dancing because the air raid siren sounds; then we switch to a battle front, with tired and scared-looking German soldiers walking through a wood, where they get ambushed.

And that’s one of the beautiful things about this film. Right from the start it gives you an insight into two sides of the story: how it felt day-to-day in war-weary England, with POW camps in town and the reaction to a German – even a good footballing German – getting involved in the community after the war. But also how it felt from the German perspective, both among the fellow POWs until the war ended, and then how it was to be that German trying to fit in and fall in love among people who perceive you as the enemy still.

All powerful stuff. And so well casted with David Kross excellent as Trautmann and Freya Mavor (was in Sunshine on Leith) very good also as Margaret. John Henshaw was really realistic also as the father and football coach in dank, dark northern England in post-war.

Some scenes didn’t work as well for me – like the big discussion between the couple some months after the tragedy of losing their son – but as Bea pointed out to me, the stilted dialogue might well have been true to the time, when people’s self-awareness and communication skills were not as advanced as today, not to mention emotional literacy.

But this is a moving film about milestones in individual lives and milestones in history, with some great football footage thrown in, and I particularly loved the vintage image of muddy pitches, those proper jerseys footballers wore in those days, and the massive crowds of men in flat caps totally exposed to the rain. Ah it was a different world back then.

I must see this film again.

*****

Bea says: I wasn't overly keen on seeing this as i thought it would be an overdose on football, and being that bit younger than Cecil, I didn't know anything about Bert Trautmann at all.

But -  l loved it, would be happy to watch it multiple times and we bought my parents the DVD for Christmas.  

This is possibly because there are some cultural reference points for me - although the era and place was different, my UK mother married a German migrant, and as a result there were many aspects of the story, their relationship, wider family acceptance and societal attitudes that felt very relatable to me.  

But even without that, this film has a bit of something for everyone I think.  Bert's story is definitely a lesson in stoicism and keeping on going without complaint.  2019 has been a stressful year for me, and that was a helpful message for me to hear.  The couple face some very difficult times, and not everything works out rosily in the end - but it works out, and that is life.  

Some great vintage costumes too!

****.5

Sunset

Seen at the Capitol Theatre, Melbourne

Cecil says: Sunset was not what I was expecting. I knew it was set in Budapest  before the first world war so it would have an end-of-empire feel to it, and I don’t really think I wanted a Merchant Ivory style take on the period, but it was a bit disappointing not to have any magnificent street or river scapes that made it clear it was filmed in Budapest itself.

In fact by the end of the film, I wasn’t even sure that the whole thing wasn’t filmed in some studio or other somewhere in Europe.

We saw it at the magnificently refurbished Capitol Theatre in Melbourne, along with at least 500 others, as part of the wonderful Melbourne International Film Festival.

The new interior there is extraordinary, with amazing LED lights a 21^st century echo of the lighting system they had when the Capitol first opened in the silent movie era in the 1920s. The sound system is also superb, muffling the noise of conversation among the audience but making what happened on the screen perfectly audible. I have to say, though, that I have never been a fan of surround sound, so the voices behind the protagonist coming out of speakers high up towards the back of the auditorium just doesn’t work for me in a cinema, especially when I sit at the back and they come somewhere to my left rather than behind.

And sound is somehow vital to this movie. We focus almost exclusively on Irisz, the daughter of the Leiters, who ran an exclusive hat shop in Budapest, but who died when she was an infant in a blaze that destroyed the premises. But so much of the dialogue – especially from the men around her – comes in grunts or dark, whispered words into ears, whether hers or others around her.

It’s a slightly weird effect along with the long silent looks at her face, with eyes gazing out into nowhere, but giving us the viewer no real clue as to what she might be thinking or feeling.

In fact, by the end of the film, although Irisz is the focus throughout (and it’s for over two hours, by the way), we don’t truly know much about her or what makes her tick. Or even what she truly is.

The final scene in the WW1 trenches is gloomy and miserable, but then she appears, staring again but wordless, like a ghost. And I was left wondering if the whole point was that she was a spirit, never really there but appearing when terrible things are about to unfold.

When a film is this full of symbolism, it can be hard to get inside the story (so unlike Merchant Ivory). There is a storyline, as she returns to Budapest trying to get a job at her parents’ old shop, as the new owner works towards its 30^th anniversary (in his hands?), and we know we are building towards revelations about her family and about the nobility and its slow fall towards oblivion in this part of Europe.

I enjoyed the film but it did feel rather long, and if it hadn’t been at the Capitol, I might well have drifted off in some of the slower parts.

***

Bea says: I am writing this review some time after Cecil did his, and I have to say what I remember most of this experience is the wonderful Capitol Theatre, rather than the film, which is a fairly slow moving, languid period piece with a dreamlike ending.  I don't mind this genre, but the story didn't really stay with me at all, and I had to reread Cecil's review to remember it at all.

**.5

The Third Wife

Seen at the Theatre Royal, Castlemaine

Cecil says: Nice to get time on a lazy Sunday to go to our local cinema the Theatre Royal in Castlemaine. The Third Wife has that slow, sensuous pace that can make me drift off to sleep, though, especially on a lazy Sunday, and I think I did momentarily drop off a couple of times through the film.

Set in 19^th century Vietnam, this is a closely observed social commentary on the lives of women at the time. We focus mainly on May, the 14 year old who is married to a man who already has two other wives, and she goes on a journey of self-discovery and into womanhood while still enjoying playing with the younger daughters of one of the other wives.

We don’t really know anything of the husband and he only appears occasionally, to make love with one or other of his wives or to try to broker a deal over the marriage of his wayward son (to the first wife).

But we don’t need to know really. This is a film about women, their relationships between themselves and their tentative forays into letting their own passions surface.

Slow-paced it certainly is, with long periods of no sound track at all, but close-up camera angles on the intimacies and banality of every day life. We watch a chicken being bled to death slowly, we see May fainting while she gives birth very painfully; there are long slow pourings of tea into cups and water into trays; and the old grandfather appears now and then, seemingly a gentler soul than the husband, though I didn’t quite get the symbolism of his clothing, or his wisdoms, or indeed whether he might have been blind…

But there is a definite message that being a woman in this kind of world is not something to be yearned for, and indeed one of the younger girls says rather pointedly that when she grows up she wants to be a man… which links in possibly to the very last scene of the film, but I won’t do a spoiler for that, and I may be misreading her final actions…

***

Bea says: I have been interesting in Asian cinema since that run of cross-over successes in the 1990s (Raise the Red Lantern etc).  The beautiful cinematography combined with the slow pace is more reminiscent of reading a novel than watching a film for me.  It's the perfect genre for a Sunday afternoon.

I enjoyed this film as a visual experience - it's visually stunning, and I enjoyed seeing women's lives documented, although their lives of servitude (either as servants or as daughters and wives) were very difficult indeed.

***.5

Bhonsle

Seen at the Glasgow Film Theatre as part of the Glasgow Film Festival 2019

Cecil says: We saw Bhonsle at the Glasgow Film Festival. We chose it to get a view of Indian cinema, having seen Belgian and Ukrainian films earlier in the Festival. It’s what film festivals are all about, and I actually wish some of these films were available to watch more widely in between events like this.

Bhonsle was not an up-beat Bollywood style film by any means. It is set in Mumbai (I think), but it’s not the hustle-bustle Mumbai we’d normally see in Indian films.

We follow the early retirement of police officer Bhonsle, who lives in a damp, dripping one room dwelling inside a community tenement. It’s actually stiflingly quiet, and one of the early scenes has a nightmare in the head of the new retiree as he imagines himself getting old in this same space, doing the same mundane tasks day-in, day-out.

But the film is actually all about the criss-crossing hierarchies of Indian society. There’s inter-tribal conflict, dreadful hierarchies within the different castes or ethnic groups, and most significant of all, horrendous violence: I’m not sure which scene was the more disturbing, when the bottom-of-the-pile Vilas rapes the outsider, but educated and professional woman Sita, or the final scenes when Bhonsle gets into a deadly fight with Vilas.

Hierarchy and status, belonging and excluding. These are the aspects of Indian society that Bhonsle the film highlights. It’s a depressing sight, but maybe that’s the aim of Director Devashish Makhija, to raise awareness and to make people see the folly of such layers.

What’s interesting if you stand back from the film and assess things with some distance is that the main character Bhonsle is clearly sick and tired of these structures, and actually the vast majority of his neighbours also really just want to get on with their lives. It is a small band of resentful men at one level, and powerful men at the other end who have an interest in maintaining the status quo.

But even the local cop who keeps Bhonsle from access to his boss, while seemingly organising the politics of his tribe, the Marathi, tells Vilas that his methods are out-of-date and he needs to change with the times, too. So maybe there is hope in there somewhere. It’s just hard to see it, and I didn’t leave the cinema with a joyous skip in my step.

We did finish the evening with that other great export of Indian society, though, and feasted on the excellent curries round the corner from the Glasgow Film Theatre, at the Wee Curry Shop.

***.5

Bea says: I saw Bhonsle at a time where I was feeling quite stressed by work and was dreaming of retirement as a potential way out.  Bhonsle's forced retirement and struggle with meaning gave me a different perspective on my own situation, and if a film can do this it is in my view always a sign of good writing and production.

Generally though, this is a grim watch that explores India's complex society, but again has relevance for all societies, with themes such as the position of migrants (particularly those who come in to work) and gender violence.

Not a feel good film, but worth a watch.  I recommend a comforting, fun activity afterwards. 

***.5

Yesterday

Seen at the Theatre Royal, Castlemaine

Cecil says: If you want a feel-good movie with lots of music you know and love, then Yesterday might just be the film for you. We saw it on a dreary winter’s afternoon in our local cinema, the Theatre Royal in Castlemaine.

The film is about a rather average singer in suburban England, who happens to be one of only three people on the planet who know all the Beatles songs after a worldwide power cut deletes any history of a range of things from cigarettes to Coca-Cola and from The Beatles to Oasis.

He puts together a couple of collections of ‘Beatles’ songs and gradually rises from unsuccessful pub singer to sharing a stage with Ed Sheeran (who plays himself in the film) at major gigs around the world.

The funniest scenes for me are of his first efforts to make a recording, when a local lad gets him into his makeshift ‘studio’ in his living room. This reminded me of my own early efforts to create a podcast a few years ago. We used my friend Dylan’s lounge room to make the recordings, but were constantly interrupted by barking dogs, ice cream vans, kids next door coming home from school and Dylan’s Mum arriving back with the shopping in crinkly crunchy plastic bags.

There’s also the very true-to-life saga of putting together the words of ‘Penny Lane’ (there was no song sheet of course since The Beatles hadn’t existed): who did pick up the rice and what was Father McKenzie upto? How did that second verse end?

That’s the beauty of the film, though. This is a very ordinary bloke doing what all of us would do ourselves, but trying to work with absolute masterpieces of music and poetic insights.

Somehow or other our hero gets to meet the real John Lennon, still alive on the South Coast somewhere in 2019. I forget how that story-line connects up, but it is a very poignant meeting, with Lennon philosophical about life and happiness – and no sign of McCartney anywhere.

The music of course is great, though I had expected we’d hear more of Yesterday, given the film’s title, and brings home yet again just how wonderful the Fab Four were, with lyrics and tunes that can make even an average singer sound great.

Hey Jude is the only hit I actually remember singing along to on Top of the Pops so that was poignant for me, even with Ed Sheeran’s twist to the title (no spoiler from us here…).

And we walked away from the cinema with a smile on our faces, arm around each other, though a wistful sense of nostalgia also in the air around us as we headed home.

A lovely afternoon

***.5

Bea says: This film had received mixed reviews and I was somewhat hesitant about seeing it, but as it was on at our (lovely) local, and we had some weekend time, and I was in need of a pick-me-up, I thought there was really nothing to lose.  And there certainly wasn't - I loved this film. 

I should have known, as Richard Curtis (screenwriter for this one) is always good, even when he isn't.  The premise is clever, it is well handled and at times very funny (particularly Ed Sheeran), but with a twist of poignancy and nostalgia, just the right ingredients for a feel-good film which stays the right side of being soppy or overly sentimental.  

For me, the best part of the film is the gradual revealing of the meaning of the yellow submarine, and the overall message that things sometimes do work out, and that music brings joy into the world regardless.

I would highly recommend this to anyone, but perhaps particularly if you are in need of a tonic generally.

****.5

Mary Poppins Returns

Seen at the Regent Theatre, Melbourne

Bea says: Cecil and I were lucky enough to bag advance tickets to some special screenings of this film at Melbourne's historic Regent Theatre, and a couple of friends joined us which made for a lovely city outing in those days between Christmas and New Year.

I probably last watched the original Mary Poppins when I was the age of many audience members (perhaps 5 or 6) and don't remember the story well, except for the Chim-Chimenee scene and song, the chalk paintings and the carousel horses.  But I did read the books (all of them) in early primary school, so also have a sense of how the books present the characters and stories.  I say stories as they are just that - a sequence of short stories really, and I understand that this was a challenge for both films.

But - it is a good effort for a sequel.  The all star cast (Emily Blunt, Colin Firth - playing a baddie, Meryl Streep, Angela Lansbury to name a few) save any weaknesses in plot and context, although Cecil and I both felt the songs were not as strong, and I at times felt the writing team may have been struggling to keep a distinct plot line going.  It did occasionally venture into Harry Potter territory (Meryl Streep's sequence particularly), and that was when I felt it was most tangential in terms of plot and context.  There are many (I think) references to the original; I didn't really need those and sometimes they just made me wonder why - the penguins for example, don't really belong in the book sequence...

The second half of the film picks up the pace and overall it is satisfying and a great little piece of escapism as a film, with a few nice moments and messages.  Again, perfect for those days between Christmas and New Year; Cecil and I had just been for a long walk on a pier before entering the theatre so we both had a few minutes of shut eye during the first half, with no ill effects in terms of following the plot or characters. 

We had a slap up cream tea afterwards with our friends; highly recommended as a follow up to a screening of this!

***1/2 

Cecil says: It’s confession time for me, here. I have never seen the original Mary Poppins. I kind of knew some of the songs, but to be honest these mid-60s classic musicals all blur into one for me, so Sound of Music and My Fair Lady as well – films I never saw when they came out in my childhood.

Bea had to give me a quick tutorial on Mary Poppins before we left for the day out, especially as it was impossible to find an online copy of the original movie.

And really we went to Mary Poppins Returns because it was a chance to see a film at the wonderful Regent Theatre in Melbourne. I’d have gone even if it was the most unsuitable loud fantasy war game movie because it was the venue that counted.

So I had nothing to compare the new Poppins to.

As Bea says, the songs were a bit disappointing, I thought. None of them felt catchy enough to be humming them later; none of them felt particularly enjoyable to watch even on the screen. In fact, if comparisons are to be made, my other recent experiences of musicals – Sunshine on Leith and the Greatest Showman – both had catchier and more uplifting tunes, to be honest.

I think the last song of all was my favourite, but even that one I have already forgotten, just a week later.

As for the all-star cast, Emily Blunt was pretty good in the title role; Meryl Streep was flamboyant and clearly enjoyed herself, but I kind of wondered ‘Why?” at her cameo; Colin Firth was fine as the baddie. But my favourite was Angela Lansbury, who comes on very late but for me took the show.

It was fun to see the Two Chairmen pub in one of the early scenes, since I used to work in an office very close to there.

But I really haven’t got much else to say about this film.

The venue was fabulous, and they put on a ‘Cockney’ chimney sweep on a bike in front of the screen before the film began, who made a quick welcome and intro for the audience in the Regent, which was a nice touch.

**.5