Search Results

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=__o55kXtjmI

(Release Info U.K. schedule May 10th, 2019, Belmont Filmhouse, Aberdeen, 49 Belmont Street, Aberdeen, AB10 1JS, 11:20 AM) "Amazing Grace" The never before seen movie featuring 'Aretha Franklin' recording the most successful gospel album of all time, 'Amazing Grace'. "Amazing Grace" is crafted from never before seen footage originally captured in 1972. 'Atlantic Records' was the pioneering home of 'Ray Charles', 'Crosby', 'Stills', 'Nash And Young', 'Otis Redding', 'Led Zeppelin', 'Cream', 'Roberta Flack', 'John Coltrane', and scores of other great 'Jazz', 'R&B' and 'Pop Artists'. The Coasters', 'The Drifters', 'Ruth Brown', 'Solomon Burke', 'Otis Redding', 'Sam & Dave', 'Wilson Pickett' head the list of 'African-American' stars that the label marketed during the 1950s and 1960s. Aretha Franklin had originally been signed to 'Columbia Records' by John Hammond, who also signed 'Billie Holiday', 'Count Basie', 'Bob Dylan', and 'Bruce Springsteen'. When her 'Columbia' career failed to ignite, 'Atlantic Records' signed her, and under the guidance of 'Jerry Wexler', 'Franklin’s' career was transformed. Starting in 1967, her string of hits, 'I Never Loved A Man', 'Respect', 'Baby I Love You', 'Chain Of Fools', 'Think', 'Don’t Play That Song, kept 'Atlantic Records' at 'The Top Of Both', 'The Pop' and 'R&B' charts. 'Franklin’s success disguised the fact that the label was losing touch with it's 'R&B' heritage following the death of 'Otis Redding' and 'Ray Charles' defection to a rival company. 'Love Of Soul Music', from 'The Supremes' to 'Al Green', had united Americans across racial lines. However, by the early 1970s, 'The Civil Rights' movement had fractured coupled with the assassinations of 'Martin Luther King' and 'Malcolm X'. This led to the growth of 'The Black Power' movement and a growing alienation of 'African Americans', and their music, from the white mainstream culture. Labels, like 'Atlantic Records', which became part of 'Warner Communications' by 1970, saw their future more and more in the exploding market for white rock groups and singer-songwriters. By 1971, 'Aretha Franklin' was known as 'The Queen Of Soul'. In the culmination of five years of chart-topping hits, she and her producer, 'Jerry Wexler' of 'Atlantic Records', decided her next recording would take her back to the music of her youth, to 'The World Of American Gospel Music'. 'Amazing Grace' was not intended as a swan song, but it would turn out to be an elegiac moment in American musical history as well as a salute to the gospel heritage that had transformed American music in the 1960s. When 'Franklin' was planning her album, 'Warner Brothers' agreed to film the session in 1972. 'Warner Communications', the parent company of 'Warner Brothers Films' and 'The Warner', 'Reprise', 'Elektra' and 'Atlantic labels', had reaped the rewards of that new buzz-word, corporate synergy with the success of the 1970 'Michael Wadleigh' film and album of 'Woodstock'. 'Warner' had paid $100,000 for the rights and the film grossed $17 million and the album sold three million copies. 'Warner Brothers Director Of Music Services', 'Joe Boyd' proposed hiring 'Jim Signorelli', a documentary filmmaker and his team of 16mm cameramen. However, before 'Signorelli’s' deal could be signed, 'Warner Brothers’ 'CEO', 'Ted Ashley', mentioned the project during a meeting with 'Sydney Pollack'. 'Pollack' immediately signed up for the project upon hearing 'Franklin’s' name. Recorded live at 'Rev James Cleveland’s' church in 'Watts', 'California' in front of a lively audience/congregation, 'Amazing Grace' would become the highest selling album of 'Franklin’s' career and the most popular 'Gospel' album of all time. However, the film was never released publicly. When recording, sound is usually post-synched on the back-lot. After the remarkable two days of recording, the editors threw up their hands. There were no clappers, no marks to guide the sound into synch with the picture. 'Pollack' hired lip readers and specialist editors but received no luck. The film languished for almost 40 years before former 'Atlantic' staff producer 'Wexler' protégé 'Alan Elliott' came to 'Wexler' and ultimately to 'Pollack'. Together, 'Elliott', 'Wexler', and 'Pollack' approached 'Warner Brothers' about using new digital technology to match sound to picture and make a film out of the raw footage. 'Aretha Franklin' was a giant of popular music and a global cultural icon. One of the best-selling musical artists of all time, with more than 75 million records sold worldwide, the undisputed 'Queen of Soul' created an amazing legacy of more than six decades. She had sung before heads of state and foreign royals and gained admiration from fans, colleagues, and fellow artists across all genres. She's known all over the world simply by her first name; Aretha. Her vocal mastery and artistic excellence have been recognized numerous times throughout her distinguished career. Twice voted as the number one 'Greatest Singer Of All Time' by 'Rolling Stone' magazine, 'Franklin' is the recipient of the U.S.A.’s highest civilian honor, 'The Presidential Medal Of Freedom', as well as an 18-time 'Grammy Award' winner, and a recipient of 'The Grammy Lifetime Achievement' and a 'Grammy Living Legend' honor. Aretha was the youngest individual ever to receive the coveted 'Kennedy Center Honor'; the first female inductee into 'The Rock & Roll Hall Of Fame'; the second female inductee into 'The US Music Hall Of Fame'; and an inductee into 'The Gospel Music Hall Of Fame'. Aretha’s gospel album, 'Amazing Grace' is the biggest-selling album and the best-selling live gospel album of all time. The album, 'Amazing Grace' is enjoying a revival nearly 50 years after it was recorded, which follows the long-awaited documentary about the making of that legendary double live album, which opened to stellar reviews. 'CBS' honored Aretha’s career on March 10th, 2019 with 'Aretha: A Grammy Tribute For The Queen Of Soul'. Aretha has been proclaimed internationally as 'The Voice Of The Civil Rights' movement, 'The Voice Of Black America', and a 'Symbol Of Black Equality'. In 1968, her spiritually uplifting voice was heard around the world singing at the funeral of 'Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.', and in 1972 at the funeral of the 'Queen Of Gospel' 'Mahalia Jackson'. Aretha’s acclaimed voice was declared a 'Natural Resource Of The State' in 1985 by 'The Department Of Natural Resources Of The State Of Michigan'. Aretha later reached a milestone in her historic career by singing at the first inauguration of 'President Barack Obama'. Forty-seven years later, this film is a testimony to the greatness of 'Aretha Franklin' and a time- machine window into a moment in American musical and social history.

40 years on from it's original release, Peter Hyams' CAPRICORN ONE remains one of the most sterling examples of sci-fi thrillers - and one of the seminal offerings from the decade of the 1970s Hyams created his script in the shadow of Watergate, based on the principle that some people didn't believe the Moon Landings happened. Produced by Lew Grade's ITC company, which went south due to the big-budget failure of RAISE THE TITANIC, prompting Lord Grade to comment 'It would have been easier to lower the Atlantic, the film told of the first manned mission to Mars. Astronauts Charles Brubaker (James Brolin, father of Josh), Peter Willis (Sam Waterston, father of Katherine) and John Walker (OJ Simpson) are interrupted during the course of preparation for blast off and advised to leave the capsule. Taken to a disused army based, they are told by Head of Space, Dr. James Kelloway (Hal Holbrook) that their life-support system has been subjected to budget compromises and that they would be dead three weeks after launch. Kelloway proposes an alternative - to fake the landing on a soundstage at the base and get them to participate in the scam. However, a real-life problem in the mission causes Kelloway to rethink the plan - and the trio of spacemen have to survive somehow... Topped off by a great score by the late Jerry Goldsmith, with cinematography by Bill (JAWS, ROCKY) Butler, CAPRICORN ONE is a classic suspend your disbelief yarn, with plenty of great moments, with great performances from Elliott Gould and David (CHARLIES ANGELS) Doyle, plus two great supporting performances in Karen Black as Gould's reporter colleague and Telly Savalas as the cynical but determined crop pilot Albain. Hyams went on to direct Sean Connery in 1981's OUTLAND and Jean-Claude Van-Damme in TIMECOP and SUDDEN DEATH. A 1970's sci-fi classic.

("The Hitman's Wife's Bodyguard" showtimes Mon 14 JUN) ● ODEON Luxe Leicester Square, 24-26 Leicester Square 17:45 20:45 ● Cineworld Leicester Square, 5-6 Leicester Square 11:20 12:50 20:50 ● Vue Cinemas - West End, 3 Cranbourn Street, Leicester Square 13:00 15:25 17:05 18:30 20:30 ● ODEON Luxe Haymarket, 11/18 Panton Street 15:00 17:00 20:30 ● Vue Cinemas - Piccadilly (Apollo), 19 Lower Regent Street 14:10 18:25 20:50 https://we-love-cinema.com/movies/52272-the-hitman-s-wife-s-bodyguard/ "The Hitman's Wife's Bodyguard" The world’s most lethal odd couple, bodyguard Michael Bryce (Ryan Reynolds) and hitman Darius Kincaid (Samuel L. Jackson), are back on another life-threatening mission. Still unlicensed and under scrutiny, Bryce is forced into action by Darius’s even more volatile wife, the infamous international con artist Sonia Kincaid (Salma Hayek). As Bryce is driven over the edge by his two most dangerous protectees, the trio get in over their heads in a global plot and soon find that they're all that stand between 'Europe' and Aristotle Papadopolous (Antonio Banderas), a vengeful and powerful madman. Joining in the fun and deadly mayhem is Senior (Morgan Freeman). We couldn’t help but wonder; what the hell would have happened to Michael Bryce after that road trip with Kincaid? Michael Bryce is still discredited and still looking to define himself after losing his 'AAA' rating as a bodyguard. He's suffering no matter what he does. He’s a man who has lost everything, worst of all, his 'Triple-A' rating, but he’s still trying to do the right thing. After taking a bullet for Darius Kincaid, he has unresolved feelings about his job. The first step, like always, is therapy. But as much as he looks for answers inside himself, his problems really do come from the loudmouth, dangerous hitman Darius Kincaid and his even more volatile wife, Sonia, who always seem to come back into his life. When your problems include detonating briefcases, 'Italian' mobsters, 'Russian' gangsters, car chases, bar brawls, explosions, shootouts, a little light torture, and overall pandemonium, there’s only so much that cognitive behavioral therapy can do about Darius and Sonia Kincaid. Darius Kincaid is just the guy you get if you need to ruin a bodyguard’s 'Triple-A Day'. He’s cool, funny, intelligent, fast thinking, incredibly good at his job, comfortable in his own skin, has no regrets, and he really, really loves his wife. He’s self-actualized and fundamentally a really happy person. Just one thing: the guy’s a totally unhinged, murdering hitman. And despite the fact that Bryce took a bullet for the guy, they still can’t stand each other. Wouldn’t we all like to be that guy?. He’s married to his soulmate and has total job satisfaction. He might be a murderer, but he’s one that’s got it all together and understands the importance of love and his relationship. He imparts a lot of that knowledge to Bryce. Kincaid feels like this overbearing, disapproving father figure throughout that film, and Bryce has massive and deep-rooted validation issues. It feels that Bryce would certainly be in therapy. There's a real potential to explore the family dynamic. That family dynamic takes form as Kincaid’s wife, the international con artist Sonia Kincaid, embraces her role as a mother figure. She’d actually be pretty good at it if not for her extreme mania, if anything, she’s even more volatile than her husband, but she does havep a way of sympathetically making peace between Bryce and Kincaid. Sonia's occupation, technically, is con artist, but she’s just as skilled and dangerous with weapons as her husband, Darius. She’s quick to anger, quick on the trigger, and will cut you to the quick. But there’s something missing from her life: Sonia desperately wants to become a mother, and it’s driving her to make some choices. After all, what perfect parents these two completely deranged people would make. She’s crazy, but not randomly crazy. She’s full of contradictions, but those contradictions make sense to me. One of the things we love about her is her thought process, it’s strange, but it’s consistent in it's strangeness. Aristotle Papadopoulos is an egomaniacal 'Greek' tycoon with all the money in the world and the national pride to match. Papadopoulos is kind of a right-wing stand-in for anyone in 'Europe' who's in disagreement with 'The European Union', he’s fighting for the rights of The Greek' people. He has all this power, intelligence, money, and an army of really nasty henchmen. Ultimately, his character is really just fighting for himself, but you get to learn that at one time he was a better man. Now he’s just very bitter, a very bad guy. As 'UN' sanctions sink 'Greece’s' economy, with ordinary 'Greeks' protesting in the streets, Papadopoulos vows to avenge his homeland and allow 'Greece' to retake it's rightful place in the world as the birthplace of history. Clearly, he’s insane. Behind a look that suggests a cross between 'Liberace', 'Scarface', and 'Aristotle Onassis', complete with blonde pompadour and orange tan. Senior is a man who Bryce admires and respects; as Bryce shows his usual lack of judgement. But even if his character doesn’t always inspire trust, Senior finds ways to make him real. Bobby O'Neil (Frank Grillo) is a classic 'American' cowboy cop, but he’s stuck, against his will, as an Interpol agent in 'Europe'. He hates every minute of it and will do anything he can to get sent back home, and like any American cowboy cop, he doesn’t care what rules he has to break to get what he wants. He’s almost constantly screaming. He’s a curmudgeon, he hates 'Europe' and he’ll do whatever he has to do to get home as fast as he can, and he’s totally unapologetic for that. But through all the gruffness and the angry shouting there’s a soft side to him, he’s got a vulnerability that makes him kind of likable. The water sequence leading up to Bryce, Kincaid, and Sonia’s violent standoff with Papadopoulos and his henchmen on the yacht, with nail-biting chaos, gunfire and explosions, is a highlight. Filmed in the quiet and picturesque harbor of 'Ravinj', the sequences required split-second timing involving a hair-raising speedboat chase through the billionaire’s heavily armed thugs. The action naturally includes fights, too, fist fights, gun fights, knife fights, wrestling, it’s all in there. Their characters are chalk and cheese. Darius Kincaid with his cool swagger against Michael Bryce’s snarky 'OCD'. Their chemistry is off the charts. When you throw Sonia into the mix, it’s even more fun. The humor and absurdist behavior is the connective tissue of this movie.

I only have one question for you. Are you coming with me? “How it ends.“. Well, I’ve never seen a movie title that sounded so ambiguous afterward. They should have replaced the period with a question mark. Even though I was very enthusiastic in the beginning. Once again a film from the Netflix Originals stable. Moreover, Forest Whitaker is playing in it. Without a doubt, one of my favorite star actors. When there’s a film with this versatile actor in the starting blocks, I’m eagerly waiting to see it. The calmness he radiates is magisterial. Even though he’s about to explode like an awakened volcano. Unfortunately, he can’t take this no-win movie to a higher level. When the end of the world becomes as boring as this movie, the tedium will kill me. It’s more about bonding. Not just the chaos. “How it ends” is the umpteenth film about a post-apocalyptic world with the usual clichés. Something that Theo James already has experience with after his participation in the “Divergent” franchise. Now, I’m not a real fan of the “Divergent” saga, but I have to admit that it had much more to offer in terms of content and visuals. “How it ends” is monotonous and has a repetitive character. I hoped that this film would be a combination of “Cell” and “Mad Max“, but it turned out to be a miserably long road movie with always the same recurring events. Eventually, I understood it was more about the relationship between Will (Theo James) and his father-in-law Tom Sutherland (Forest Whitaker) than about surviving in a chaotic debris-ridden world. The two have a very difficult relationship. And during the long trip to Seatle, you gradually see a mutual respect growing. But that’s just not what I wanted to see. Let’s find some more fuel. Over and over and over again … What you get is a sort of cross-country through the U.S. along dusty roads, deserted ghost towns, and endless vistas. And of course, there are the usual obstacles of military blockades (which, if Tom uses the correct pep talks, step aside and let them pass) and distraught people who only want one thing. And that is to get away from the disaster as quickly as possible. And it’s not exactly an easy task without fuel. The result is a struggle for this precious stuff. Mind you, this goes on the entire film. And as is customary in post-apocalyptic films, they are the heroes, who are moving against the current instead of fleeing. Closer to the source that causes all the misery. Add to that a pile of dusty desert sand and a bunch of weirdos (the Apocalypse brings out their rebellious nature) who are wildly waving around with their shotguns, and the picture is complete. They should have worked harder on the content. Now it seemed like a collection of ideas that have been raked together. Now for something positive. No, you can hardly call this overwhelming. In “Seeking a friend for the end of the world” there was just as much to see. But the latter was at least interesting and entertaining. Still, some positive comments. First, the girl Ricki (Grace Dove). Her remarks and actions were clever, bold and sometimes also quite humorous. Her remark about the names of American combat helicopters made me raise my eyebrows for a moment. I never looked at it that way before. And then the way in which everything was portrayed, is also worth mentioning. But otherwise, this would-be dystopian film completely missed the mark. It’s not really a rich addition to this well-known genre. My rating 4/10 Links: IMDB

(Release Info UK schedule; May 24th, 2019, Phoenix Cinema and Art Centre, 4 Midland Street, Leicester, LE1 1TG, 5:30pm) https://www.phoenix.org.uk/film/arctic/ "Arctic" A man stranded in 'The Arctic' after an airplane crash must decide whether to remain in the relative safety of his makeshift camp or to embark on a deadly trek through the unknown in hopes of making it out alive. Overgård (Mads Mikkelsen), the sole survivor of a plane crash in an icy wasteland, lives by his wits as he waits for help to arrive. He's a resourceful yet increasingly desperate man stranded in a remote, snow-covered wilderness. But when a long-awaited rescue effort fails, he faces a life-or-death decision; remain in the relative safety of his camp and hope to be found, or embark on an arduous trek that may be the only hope for both him and a critically injured stranger. The film opens with a scene of a man digging in the snow that's difficult to understand until we pull back into an extremely wide shot. Later, an unidentified ringing turns out to be Overgård’s makeshift signal that there's a fish on the line; his only source of food. A small pile of rocks in the beginning of the film is clearly important to him but is not explained immediately. We don’t start with the crash. We start much later. Before it happened, would they've thought this is something they could do? All of that goes into the creation of what this character does and what drives him to a completely selfless act. The ingeniously improvised solutions that Overgård outfits provide clues to his character. He’s not some kind of MacGyver who can make a radio out of tin foil, but he can create fishing lures from his own hair. From early on, it's imperative that Overgård be a stencil of a human being. In addition to extreme weather conditions and the threat of starvation, Overgård faces constant danger from a hungry polar bear that looms distantly over the action. The film hints at the bear’s presence with a sharply clawed paw here and rattling rocks there to indicate it's presence. When the solitude is shattered by the appearance of a marauding polar bear, the camera begins following Overgård like a bear tracking prey. Showing a live bear is a far more powerful choice. There are no hints to his past life, no flashbacks or photographs in his wallet, not even the glint of a wedding ring. There's no flashback scene explaining his backstory, as there's in every classic survival film. But the film never fell into that trap. Overgård is a man whose only objective is survival. Our hero can be seen solely in the actions he takes in response to what he's currently encountering. It’s a story that takes place purely in the moment. The lack of exposition is intended to encourage the audience to lean closer and decipher each moment. It's probable that each person will arrive at different conclusions. Where is he from and what is he doing in 'The Arctic'? Why does he care so much about someone he doesn’t know? We don’t know. His inner thoughts are never externalized. It isn't important to the story whether he has a family or how he got where he's. Of course, there's someone he loves. It’s implicit. But by the time the film starts he's barely alive. None of that matters. He said smart enough to invent the things he needs to get by. And that’s all the audience needs to know. When the helicopter sent to retrieve him crashes, his priorities suddenly change. The girl (Maria Thelma Smáradóttir) makes life important. The photo of her family reminds him of what it's like to be alive. It’s a subtle reminder that he has someone, but no photo. He suddenly has a purpose, not simply a survival instinct. It's a magical thing for to have someone to relate to finally. Filmed in Iceland under grueling conditions, "Arctic" marks the feature debut of director Joe Penna, creator of the innovative and popular 'YouTube' channel 'Mystery Guitar Man'. "Arctic" is a captivating, white knuckle cinematic experience that explores our insurmountable will to survive and overcome. "Arctic" was shot in the intimidating highlands of Iceland, a sparsely populated volcanic plateau where roads become impassable during the winter. The tundra is the harshest survivable environment on Earth, making it the perfect place for the story, but the issues that the terrain and weather posed for Overgård in the film are reflected in reality. Winds blows up to 40 miles an hour. Car doors broke off their hinges in the wind and tumbled hundreds of feet. The weather changes at a moment’s notice, shifting from sleet and rain to clear and sunny. "Arctic" offers limited dialogue to tell a riveting story in a 98-minute film. The film devises a unique cinematographical structure, the first 20 minutes without pans or tilts or dolly shots to emphasize the fact that Overgård is utterly alone, almost as if a remote camera is capturing the action. "Arctic" underscores the visuals with sound that completely encompasses you as the wind blows in from every direction. A visually dynamic world amidst Iceland’s grey mountain ranges, blue sky and white snow. The fragility of a human being lost in the vast and inhospitable environment is starkly demonstrated in a shot of Overgård seen as a mere dot of red crossing an endless ocean of ice and snow, slogging his way through a howling gale, barely visible through heavy spindrift. Audiences will be asking themselves whether they could withstand a close encounter with nature at it's most merciless. The idea of having to survive against all odds has a universal quality. At first, our immediate fascination will leave us trying to determine what we would do. When you speak to people forced into that kind of situation, you realize we don’t know what we can tap into. We’ve all heard about mothers who somehow manage to lift a car off of their child. The same has happened with people saving strangers. The endurance is there not just for ourselves, but also for people we don’t even know. The complications of a story about a group of people stuck in a lifeboat without enough supplies or someone shipwrecked on an island for seven years is apparent to most people, without having to know how they got there. The imperative to stay alive. It's not just humans; it’s innate in all living creatures. And though his resolve may waver, Overgård forces himself to march on as he risks his life, however more difficult or unwise, to save another. Even as his hopes of survival dwindle, he perseveres. Despite all that, this film is a parable of man against nature. “Arctic" is about the endurance of altruism even under extreme circumstances. Overgård inspires us to carry a bit of his courage out of the theater with us. It's a film that can’t just play in the background. You've to be completely engaged. You've to be actively creating your own version of the film in your head. It's a quietly gripping journey through a perilous polar wasteland.

The El Royale is a bi-state establishment. You have the option to stay in either the great state of California… or the great state of Nevada. Warmth and sunshine to the west… or hope and opportunity to the east. Which would you prefer? Let me get straight to the point. Yes, this film by Drew Goddard refers to several masterpieces from the past. And yes, it has the atmosphere, story structure and the look of a Quentin Tarantino film. You will probably read this on every movie site. Is this necessarily a bad thing? Does this mean Goddard doesn’t have his own style? Is it necessary to compare a brilliant film such as “Bad times at the El Royale” with Quentin Tarantino’s oeuvre? Personally, I don’t think so. When I get sucked into the story while watching this film, just like “The Hateful Eight” did with me, then this is a merit of Goddard himself. If a movie succeeds in keeping my eye fixed on the screen for more than 2 hours, then it’s worth a compliment. And when one compares it with another grandmaster, I guess it’s a compliment for both of them. I’m sure Tarantino will like this film as well. For starters, the location itself is pretty original. In any case, the location where the story takes place is in itself already original. A captivating motel/hotel built on the border between Nevada and California. You cross the border, as it were when you walk from the reception to the jukebox. And different laws are applied in every part of this unique hotel. But since a while, it’s abandoned. Far away from other metropolises so consequently it’s also cheaper. In earlier times though, the “El Royale” was a secret location where public figures stayed over for a night and where they could engage in rather appalling practices, far from civic life. This is where the entire story takes place. A story with different storylines with each time a character in a leading role who happens to looks quite ordinary at first acquaintance. As the film progresses, it turns out they all have their own hidden agenda. And all these storylines are entwined with each other until it finally ends in a rousing apotheosis. Characters with dark secrets. So, it’s not a secluded cabin which is unreachable thanks to excessive snowfall (I know. I’m comparing again). And the pawns that are set out at the beginning (like in a game of Cluedo) are a priest (Jeff Bridges), a soul singer (Cynthia Erivo), a vacuum cleaner salesman (Jon Hamm), a rebellious young lady (Dakota Johnson), and a shy young receptionist (Lewis Pullman). A grab-bag of people who apparently happen to spend the same night in El Royale. After the introduction of the characters, the film is divided into episodes and a fragmentary web of storylines arises in which the dark secret of each character comes up. And before you know it, the vacuum cleaner dealer is someone who resembles a secret agent, the priest is looking for something more valuable than God’s message, the rebellious lady is on the run from someone devilish and the receptionist has a past full of victims. Only the soul singer seems authentic and has a damn good voice. The less you know, the better. Maybe it sounds a bit vague. But believe me: the less you know, the better. I was surprised again and again by the various twists. And those twists sometimes come from an unexpected angle. It wasn’t only the way of filming that pleased me, but also the subtlety with which it was all interwoven. Some story elements were shown from three viewpoints. Time and time again in a new storyline. Normally this could lead to confusion. But here it fits perfectly. And this all in a typical 60s setting with accompanying props, appropriate clothing and a Wurlitzer that produced that distinctive Motown sound. Take “Pulp Fiction“, “Twin Peaks” and “The Hateful Eight” and you get a movie like “Bad times at the El Royale” after a good shake-up. Simply wonderful. How about acting? Let’s talk about renditions. Actually, there is no character that disappointed. Each has his/her reasons for being there and has his/her own personality traits. It was clear from the beginning they were all enjoying themselves while playing their part. Once more the acting of Jeff Bridges as a priest was a joy to watch. Even though he talks as if he’s nibbling on chewing tobacco or a hot potato as in “R.I.P.D” and “Seventh Son“, I simply thought he was sublime as the priest with Alzheimer’s. And certainly, the interactions between him and Cynthia Erivo are simply great. She also has a beautiful voice that came in handy in a specific splendid scene. Chris Hemsworth. Give that man a cigar. Personally, I thought Lewis Pullman was the most imaginative character as the labile receptionist. And Dakota Johnson not only had the most titillating body contours, but she also took on the most insane part. And finally an honorable mention for the admirable performance by Chris Hemsworth (he’s forgiven for his role as Kevin in “Ghostbusters“). He’s a cult leader who shows up as a dead calm Jim Morrison-like creep (Watch him dance). The beginning of an out of control denouement. A must see? Yeah sure! “Bad times at the El Royale” is definitely recommended and is not boring for a second. I thought it was an original tinkered story that ends in a shrewd way. Add to that a top cast and an atmospheric décor that is put in the picture with the help of masterful footage, and you can be sure that you’ll enjoy the full two and a half hours. And claiming that the film is right up Tarantino’s alley, certainly is true. But to assert that it’s a shameless imitation, I find a little bit exaggerated and a typical sour note from a sourpuss. My rating 8/10 Links: IMDB More reviews here

(Release Info London schedule; November 6th, 2018, Empire, Haymarket, 11:50) "Widows" When Harry Rawlins (Liam Neeson), Florek (Jon Bernthal), Carlos (Marvel Garvis-Ruffo) and Noel (Eric Lynch), four armed robbers, are killed in an explosive heist attempt, their widows, with nothing in common except a debt left behind by their dead husbands' criminal activities, take fate into their own hands to forge a future on their own terms.   Veronica Rawlins (Viola Davis) is the lead widow of the film who must pick up the pieces of her life after her husband, Harry, dies in a failed heist. She's sort of mysterious, but at the same time she's familiar to us. When you first meet them, the couple have already been damaged by a tragic death. They very much are bonded by grief. And then Harry dies in a heist accident and she’s left with nothing, literally nothing. Nothing in terms of finances and nothing in terms of even emotional reserve. But she decides to live. She decides to live by finishing the heist Harry was supposed to commit. Step one, employ her crew, the widows of Harry’s cohorts in crime. And people can roll their eyes, but something needs to be said about it, really. Because at what point in the history of cinema, have you seen someone who looks like Veronica and someone who looks like Harry in bed together, kissing, romantic, in love, married? Linda (Michelle Rodriguez) is a widow struggling to keep her family and dress shop afloat after Carlos death. She's a Latina woman, who faces the machismo of her culture. Ultimately, it's her decision to face her fears of the unknown that make up her mind. Linda is naïve and trusting when we first meet her. She got pregnant young in life and married her high school sweetheart, and was a mother very young. So, she didn’t really have much of an opportunity to decide, really, what she was going to do with her life. Her greatest manifestation is the story you see here. She’s a woman who’s loyal and loves her man and loves her family. Alice (Elizabeth Debicki) is a 'Polish Immigrant and married to Florek. She's the least savvy, most sheltered of the widows. She has an incredible warmth and generosity and sensitivity and she's's also very exacting and instinctive in a fascinating way. She's rigorously in pursuit of truth in it's rawest form. When we meet Alice her world is very small and repressive. She's gone from living with her mother (Ann Mitchell) in a controlled environment where she's her mother's doll, to being dominated and controlled by her husband. She's very submissive, she can’t conceive of life being otherwise because she has internalized what others have told her about herself, that she's worthless and that she needs them in order to survive. She’s told she cannot be independent emotionally, financially, socially and she believes this. Alice's journey it's such a huge arc for her through the course of the story. She goes from being someone who has accepted what the world tells her she's daughter and then she's a wife, Something to be seen and not heard, a woman who mustn’t ask for what she wants or needs, to a woman taking control of her life. The process of joining up with the other widows and taking part in the heist develops her sense of self-worth and self-esteem.   Belle (Cynthia Erivo) is married to Noel. She's an ally who steps in to help the widows in their quest. Her character is strong and complex. She’s very straightforward. She's from 'The South Side' so she's no stranger to the danger that happens around her area. She's now a single mother, and she's a hairdresser but she's got smarts about her and she has almost no fear. She just knows what needs to be done in order to survive. That's where she comes from, so when she meets these women, it isn't a second thought that she's able to help. The one familiar element is that all of the men died in this fire, and they're all thieves. That’s the only thing that binds the widows together. And, also the fact that they're all broke and need to survive now. They're in a survival mode. A politician who figures into the widows master plan is Jack Mulligan (Colin Farrell). His life is already mapped out for him based on his family lineage. The son of Tom Mulligan (Robert Duvall), Jack is meant to follow in his father’s footsteps by becoming the next alderman for 'The 18th Ward Of Chicago'. So, there's obviously this very distinct lineage that he's supposed to fall in line with, and Jack Mulligan is supposed to carry his father’s torch, his father who carried his father’s torch, but it’s not really what he wants. It’s not really what he’s dreamed of doing. Not only is Jack dealing with his own personal demons but he's running against an enigmatic opponent. There’s a shift in the power politic that is potentially happening, and the person who’s running against him is an 'African-American' gentleman from 'The 18th Ward', who has a history of criminality in his life. And he’s choosing to go straight, but he’s running against him. And 'The Ward' he's running to represent is predominantly 'African-American', and so it’s not looking good for him at all. Tom Mulligan is an elderly guy who’s somewhat ailing physically and still trying to keep some kind of control. Even though his son, they hate each other, love-hate, is really running the show, he’s trying to tell his son we’ve got to keep this city in our hold, in our grasps. It’s our city. We got to keep control and he doesn’t want to hear this, but they've a complicated love-hate, father-son relationship.   Jamal Manning (Brian Tyree Henry) is Jack’s political opponent in 'The 18th Ward' and a man to whom, Veronica discovers, Harry owes money. Henry says he knew he had to be a part of this special project. This is his home. You know, he says that to Jack. He’s like, you know, your family is on this ward, done all these things with this ward, but look at it. Like it hasn’t gotten anywhere. What have you really contributed to us? And that’s the best thing about Jamal is that he and his brother Jatemme (Daniel Kaluuya) they’re from these streets. They’re from this area. They really do care about the people there. Now, you know, as politics go, you kind of got to do what you gotta do to get where you want to get. He's also Jamal’s protector. It’s easy to think of Jatemme as the muscle, as you know, the bully or the henchman that does what Jamal wants, but Jatemme really wants the best for his brother and wants to be right there. Whereas Jamal loves him dearly, he’s using him as a pawn, but at the end of the day Jamal is going to do what he’s got to do to get where he’s going to get. But there's a true depth to their relationship there, cause it’s just been us. You basically see how they got to where they're, and Jatemme is one of the main reasons why and how they’ve managed to get the support of the community and the funding of the community through how Jatemme moves. And he basically does a lot of things he shouldn’t be doing. In addition to helping his brother politically, Jatemme is also responsible for muscling in on Veronica to collect the money Harry owes Jamal. Veronica’s late husband did something very not nice among brothers. And they want some payback. They’re just not going to let things lie. But it’s in the middle of a political election, so they've to do things in a bit more of a discreet way. "Widows" is based on the popular U.K. television series of the same name, created by Lynda La Plante. The show transported us into a criminal world where the most vulnerable and overlooked people were women. These women were deemed incapable of anything other than being judged by their appearances, yet they took on challenges against their stereotype and transformed themselves into more than capable forces, determined to take their destinies into their own hands. Their adversaries considered the widows as people who couldn’t achieve anything, and they did. The film changes the location of "Widows" from London in the early eighties to Chicago of the present. "Widows" is set in contemporary Chicago amidst a time of political and societal turmoil. This is vital in order to also tackle politics, religion, class, race, criminality and mourning, and to look at the locale Chicago and revert it like a telescope into the global. And you just don’t see Chicago enough, the real Chicago in film. How does Chicago relate to the story of the movie? And how do the film ties those two together visually and thematically and hold onto that in a way that's legitimate; in a way that doesn't feel like taking the ideas about what the place is, or the ideas about what it should be and laying it on top of what the city is, rather than trying to find out what's really here and finding out the truth of the place. Chicago has so many levels. Political, racial, religion, policing and criminality and how all of these networks at some point crossover and have a relationship to each other. You've this vibrant city with great restaurants and beautiful high-rises on 'Lakeshore Drive', and beautifully manicured lawns and, God, what a great artistic scene and all of that. But, you've the other. You've 'The Lawndales', 'The Garfield Parks', 'Fhe Inglewoods', you know, the neighborhoods that have a high crime rate. You've 'The Segregation', and that only happens with corruption. The film wants to understand when you cross lines, how things change and how neighborhoods change. Ultimately, the film showcases every part of the city. And each of the characters come from really diverse backgrounds. What's so exciting about it's the different stories of all these different women, and also Jamal Manning and also Jack Mulligan. It's very challenging to say, how do you find each one of these stories? How do you keep them visually discreet from one another? For instance, with Chicago architecture, a lot of apartments kind of look the same, so saying okay, how you find these really radically different looking places for these different women and make them appropriate? You know, not making those random choices but finding each character in a different kind of a place. And having it be the kind of thing that the character needs. Veronica’s penthouse has a great quality, these floor-to-ceiling windows let in this incredible light that could turn the place very warm or very cold. It could be expansive and embracing the whole city, or it could be a box that's just reflecting back. That quality is something that's exciting to all of us, and the film ends up turning the glass windows into mirrors at different times to reflect the life held within rather than seeing out on the city. There are lots of different subtle ways of showing the differences, cause the story goes from the very, very rich and powerful to the poorest and least powerful members of society. And, there are subtle ways within the lighting where you try and emphasize that a little bit with the richer characters having a little bit more warmth in their life and more ordinary colors. And then, as it becomes poorer, you start to get mixed colors and that chaos within that world.  This is a heist film starring four women. The story offers a twist on the typical heist film in that each character that intersects comes from different ethnic, financial and social background. These women coming together, not because one is a jewel thief, and one is a safe cracker, that type of thing, but because they just happen to all be connected by their husbands. It's a group of ordinary women in extraordinary circumstances who've to fight for their survival. What’s so powerful about this story is that these four women from different racial, social and financial backgrounds came together to achieve their common goal. They understood that by working together they're capable of anything. When you watch the film, you’ll see there’s almost a mundane-ness to some of the stunts, to some of the action that happens. "Widows" is a real crowd-pleaser. It’s one of those films in which people are never going to see anything that’s coming. The film wants people to come away with a sense of awakening.

(Glasgow Film Festival: Film AT Home; Thu 25 Feb to Sun 28 Feb) https://glasgowfilm.org/glasgow-film-festival/shows/the-mauritanian-n-c-15 "The Mauritanian" "The Mauritanian" follows the remarkable true story of Mohamedou Ould Slahi (Tahar Rahim), who was captured by 'The U.S. Government' and imprisoned for years without trial at 'Guantanamo' Bay (GTMO). It's an inspiring account of survival against all odds as Slahi, in his fight for freedom, finds allies in defence attorney Nancy Hollander (Jodie Foster) and her associate Teri Duncan (Shailene Woodley). Through Nancy and Teri’s controversial advocacy and evidence uncovered by formidable military prosecutor Lieutenant Colonel Stuart Couch (Benedict Cumberbatch), a shocking and far-reaching conspiracy is revealed. "The Mauritanian" is a commentary on the importance of 'The Rule Of Law' and extremism of all kinds, but is also a tender, funny, uplifting film about Mohamedou, an extraordinary man whose humanity triumphed, leaving those around him profoundly changed. Hey this is what it’s like to be ripped apart and ripped from your family and taken to some place you've no idea where you're. The story is driven by Mohamedou who's a transcendent person, a philosopher, he’s so witty and so compassionate. Mohamedou is charming and funny and not what you expect, from an internationally wanted, excused, terrorist, criminal who's accused of recruiting people for '9/11' and financing terror. He’s the opposite of what you imagine, he’s so in love with 'American' culture, he can quote every line of 'The Big Lebowski', he knows it by heart because he watched it 110 times while he's in prison. This guy has been through hell like this and at the end didn’t hold any grudge against anyone. He's a hero, an innocent man imprisoned and tortured. The incredible grace of forgiveness that Mohamedou practices through all of that, everyone can hopefully learn through what's a very difficult time in the world. His forgiveness is what makes him so special and what saves him to not fall into madness. He’s not angry at all, it’s impressive, he has the right to be angry, but he’s not. It takes a soul that’s so strong and whatever his life brings him for the rest of his life, he’s here to move mountains, and he already is. He’s changing the world, and his effect will go on for centuries simply by the energy that he carries into every moment of his life. Nancy Hollander is an 'International Criminal Defence Attorney', who fights for Mohamedou Ould Slahi’s release. Most of Mohamedou’s contact with Nancy happened in a room identical to the cell that he occupied when he entered the torture program, and after that, when he becomes a ‘cooperating prisoner’ he's interned in the same kind of cell, but with less restrictions. Nancy feels very maternal towards him, and you can just see the twinkle in both of their eyes. It’s so obvious they really care about one another. Nancy is an extraordinarily brilliant woman who's just a ball of contradictions. She's this very structured thinker, very smart, very measured, she’s very careful about everything she says and yet she loves her red lipstick and nail polish. She loves fast cars, she likes sports-cars, she likes digital equipment and yet she's this public defender and she has this long road as an activist. So many parts of her are conflicting, and that’s what’s beautiful about real characters, real people. Real people are not all just one thing. Nancy is really a combination of so many things. She's unrelenting, she's not sentimental, and she's a career fighter. It's a tricky character. It's been very surreal for everybody, for Mohamedou and certainly for Nancy to see the recreation of 'GTMO'; to see the camp set up, to see the barbed wire, and fencing and the concrete walkways, the kind of sad air conditioners; and all of the military men in their various regalia. It’s hard not to feel like you’re back in that environment. All the dark parts of the film are cool grey and concrete, and the film slightly desaturated and darkened a lot of the 'Guantanamo' interior colors just so that photographically, it's a little bit more sombre and a bit more depressing. That part of the film is all a continuous color, whereas Nancy's world in New Mexico has warmer colors, plants, natural fabrics and wood. Nancy works alongside Teri Duncan, who's an amalgamation of two attorneys, Teri Duncan and Sylvia Royce (Justine Mitchell). Teri shares a lot, she's very open, you know it’s scary to go up against the government; it’s scary to walk into something without knowing all angles and all sides of the equation, but more than anything, Teri’s heart lies in justice and her heart lies in the simple truths of like compassionate, and neighborly humanity. That overrode any fear that maybe she had. There's that warm.energy we need from that character. Neil Buckland (Zachary Levi), a 'Federal' agent is and old friend of Lt. Colonel Stuart Couch. Neil is an old school buddy of Stuart’s who happens to also be very entrenched in this specific case and these things that went down at 'Guantanamo'. He works for one of the intelligence agencies or branches within 'The U.S. Government' and so therefore is a bit of a gatekeeper when it comes to certain information that Lieutenant Colonel Stuart Couch needs in order to run a fair trial in prosecuting Mohamedou. Neil proves to be a little less than helpful in that regard because of his own traumas he felt through '9/11'. It's causing him a lot of fear and unfortunate anger and hate that a lot of people are possessed with in that time. When something as tragic as that happens, trauma can really screw people up. So, that’s where Neil’s at and then ultimately also has this redemptive moment towards the end of the film which shows you that people are more than what meets the eye, we're all 360 degree of people. He's not the most savoury character in the story. Lieutenant Colonel Stuart Couch's buddy from flight training school was one of the co-pilots on one of the planes that flew into 'The South Tower', so he starts from there, as well as being a military lawyer. He’s also a 'Christian' man that wants to do justice and wants to bring people to justice. It’s an extraordinary position to be in at the beginning of this film because you go ‘well, okay I can understand why he just wants to see this guy punished’. So what happens to him in the journey of this film is he discovers through pushing and pushing and knocking on closed doors that eventually these confessions have been extracted and they include accounts of torture, of waterboarding and various other contraventions of 'The Geneva Human Rights Accord', so he then takes a stand against his superiors and says; ' I refuse to prosecute this case', this is wrong, it's unlawful, it's undemocratic, un-'American' and un-'Christian'. And we guess it’s kind of where our sympathies lie most in the film, with someone who has every reason to want to find and persecute the perpetrator of that kind of an atrocity, that unforgivable act of terrorism, but in the process of looking at the supposed rock-solid confessions realises they're all extracted under torture; that’s not the way to get evidence. That’s not the way to behave in the rule of law. He's a man who a lot of the audience will think is deeply unsympathetic to begin with but right from the beginning you feel like ‘ok this guy, is part of the group, part of the military machine' but there's something about him which is more thoughtful, more humorous. Every character in the film is not all that they’re cracked up to be, and there’s depth and complexity in all of us. The film is based on the book ‘Guantánamo Diary’, published in 'The U.K.' in 2015 by Jamie Byng from 'Canongate'. The movie isn’t a direct adaptation of the book, the book is Mohamedou’s autobiography so he can’t tell the story from the other perspectives. The film covers the first two thirds of the story, until his appeal. 'GTMO' (Guantanamo Bay), one of the world’s most notorious detention camps, is still officially a secret and the plans of the environment aren’t available anywhere a lot of imagery has got out, but it’s not very well labelled. We were all so shaken up by the events of '9/11' that there was such fear in America, but we didn’t think very much about who was being interned. We've to be fair to all of the parties because we really believe that the truest stories are the ones where there just aren’t any bad guys. Where it’s just human beings that come together, trying to do the best that they can, but they’re guided by fear and there's a lesson in this story; is that impulse, that fear impulse is so strong and unfortunately it was in the era of 'Guantanamo', and in the era of '9/11', which took over 'The American' psyche. We're making decisions, we're making international foreign policy decisions by fear instead of using the laws and the rules that we knew. It’s a movie, it’s not just a series of events that happened you know? What we all have in common is greater than what divides us. It's something about the indefatigable joy of the human spirit. It's this combination of politics and an outrageous crime against humanity. The law is something really interesting, how it works and the intricacies of it, and you know, how our country is shaped by that. How the world is shaped by that. Any type of injustice, any type of tragedy when it comes to our failure as human beings to fully see another human being and put them through fair trial and properly practiced democracy, really gets our blood boiling. It’s a wisdom that says everything that every single ancient religious, biblical or institutional text has ever said, which is ‘just be kind to one another’, ‘love your neighbour’, ‘take care of one another’, ‘forgive’, ‘show up’. It strips back all the distraction and chaos of consumerism and materialism and plants you right back down into the true seat of your soul.

(Release Info London schedule; February 12th, 2021, Curzon Home Cinema) https://www.curzonhomecinema.com/film/watch-slalom-film-online "Slalom" 15 year-old Lyz (Noée Abita), a high school student in 'The French Alps', has been accepted to a highly selective ski club whose aim is to train future professional athletes. Taking a chance on his new recruit, Fred (Jérémie Renier), ex-champion turned coach, decides to make Lyz his shining star regardless of her lack of experience. Under his influence, Lyz will have to endure more than the physical and emotional pressure of the training. Will Lyz’s determination help her escape his grip? We see everything from Lyz’s point of view for maximum emotion. The opening scenes are fairly enigmatic. We're between a very naturalistic and well-informed work on the sporting world and, at the same time, something almost fantastical with this snow falling at night that Lyz watches from her window. There's a strong desire to plunge the audience into an intimate journey. Right from the start, the film immerses in Lyz’s inner world. We're at the heart of her sensations and as close as possible to the visions she invents for herself, in a kind of hallucinated reality. Lyz is a fighter! She wants to ski, she wants to win, she wants to be seen. She’s desperately in need of love! She wants to be recognized, she wants to shine for someone. That’s why she throws herself completely into this story. But it’s only a downward spiral, and she overcomes it. The screenplay uses the device of the spiral in which the character of Lyz finds herself. Nevertheless, the film avoids the easy solution of the spectacular. "Slalom" follows the action, to the beat of the main character’s pulse, in order to take the viewer on an intimate and instantaneous journey. In the film, there's no trial. But what Lyz lives through and why she lives through it speaks more to us. In the end Lyz learns to say no. All the action is expressed through her eyes. To learn to respect yourself, you've to learn to say no. It's very important for Lyz to say no. In direction terms, at that specific moment, everything around her exists almost exclusively off-camera. The film ends up on her face, so that the viewer is able to see her soothed and almost weightless. She renounces in order to find inner peace. During the film, she has gone through every shade of emotion. Rage, anger, pain, joy, rebellion. It’s the only time in the movie when Lyz is calm and at peace. She's really in tune with herself and emerges victorious. The film condemns sexual abuse in sports, that’s the subject, but it’s also the resilience that drives Lyz to move forward. You can feel her gradually regaining her awareness of herself and her newfound freedom. The ending is optimistic and represents a form of wisdom. Fred (Jérêmie Rénier) trains young people in a ski-study program to enter competitions, race, make it to the top of the podium and achieve their ultimate dream; to become 'Olympic' champions. He's a former ski champion who could have made it, but who probably had an accident and had to stop racing. He’s become a coach in spite of himself. That’s the subject; how can a man reach the point where he does those kinds of things when, at first, he doesn’t seem like a rapist, a psychopath, or a guy that’s sick. How do you reach the point of losing your mind, of losing a form of control? That's the subject of our discussions and our fears. So, he’s experiencing a kind of frustration up until the day when he meets this girl, Lyz, on whom he’s going to project a lot of things. They've to transmit, to put themselves in their place and fantasize about their success. For a coach, the success of your work comes first and foremost through that of your students. The character of Fred is above all a man, a human being and not a monster. He slips up, he blames himself and he too is eaten up by guilt, desire and envy. In the end, "Slalom" can almost be seen as a feminist film as the women take centre stage, such as the characters of Lyz’s mother Catherine (Marie Denarnoud) and Lilou (Muriel Combeau), Fred’s wife. This mother fascinates us. She feels love but, at the same time, she wants to live her life. Lilou, on the other hand, clings to Fred and lies a little to herself even if she wants to denounce something. She doesn’t really know how to do it. When the recent sex scandals in the sports world broke, the film was finished. With "Slalom" people will be able to understand the message. If the film had been released a few years ago, it's reception would have definitely been different. But now people are speaking out. And we know that stories like the one in the film are everywhere and in every sport. "Slalom" aims to fuel a debate and free up speech concerning the issue of sexual domination in sport. And then the subconscious need to denounce such practices came to the fore as the main focus of the film. Sexual abuse and assault in sports is a taboo subject. Cinema is an ideal medium for listening, watching, guessing what's never said, and revealing the gods and demons that hide deep in our souls. The fantastical aspect is reminiscent of genre cinema. It comes from the desire for aestheticism or fiction, to plunge into an intimate journey because that’s how we see things. The goal is to avoid all didacticism. There's documentary film on the one hand and fiction on the other. Fiction imposes an artistic and aesthetic vision. This isn’t a film with an agenda, it’s a film that’s meant to be open about the subject; it’s not a settling of scores. It’s a work of fiction, almost like a psychological thriller. "Slalom" creates a very strong visual world. The film deals with adolescence and the awakening of desire. Resilience and the quest for identity are two issues that are close to our heart. The notion of the quest for identity is very important in the journey. The heroines try to find themselves, take risks, fall and then finally get up again. There's a kind of revelation. What the film is particularly interested in is trauma and how you recover from it. Talking about emotions in adolescence means talking about what manifests itself, motivates and moves you. It’s a time when emotions are in motion, when they take shape even though we don’t yet know how to contain, name and give meaning to what's going on in us. It's also the moment when we test our limits and when, in order to exist, we project ourselves in the eyes of others, even if it means sometimes going astray. Adolescence is indecision, adrenaline and risk-taking, incredibly rich and interesting sensations to film. In life, people are contradictory and that's precisely what will lead to a journey that's certainly rocky but nevertheless rich. "Slalom" is an intimate manifesto on renunciation and resilience.

(Regent Street Cinema, 307 Regent Street, London, W1B 2HW, ● Screening from 26th Mar) https://www.regentstreetcinema.com/whats-on/ammonite/ https://www.regentstreetcinema.com/staying-well/ (Release Info London schedule; March 28th, 2021, Curzon Home Cinema) https://www.curzonhomecinema.com/film/watch-ammonite-film-online "Ammonite" 1840s England, acclaimed but overlooked fossil hunter Mary Anning (Kate Winslet) and Charlotte (Soairse Ronan) sent to convalesce by the sea develop an intense relationship, altering both of their lives forever. In the 1840s, acclaimed self-taught palaeontologist Mary Anning works alone on.the wild and brutal 'Southern English' coastline of 'Lyme Regis'. The days of her famed discoveries behind her, she now hunts for common fossils to sell torich tourists to support herself and.her ailing widowed mother. When one such tourist, Roderick Murchison (James McArdle), arrives in Lyme on the first leg of a 'European' tour, he entrusts Mary with the care of his young wife Charlotte, who's recuperating from apersonal tragedy. Mary, whose life is a daily struggle on the poverty line, cannot afford to turn him down but, proud and relentlessly passionate about her work, she clashes with her unwanted guest. They're two women from utterly different worlds. Yet despite the chasm between their social spheresand personalities, Mary and Charlotte discover they can each offer what the other has been searching for: the realization that they are not alone. It's the beginning of a passionate and all-consuming love affair that will defy all social bounds and alter the course of both lives irrevocably. When "Ammonite" begins, we find Mary Anning slightly past her prime at this point, the days of her making huge discoveries as a leading scientist in the field of palaeontology are somewhat over, and she’s a little bit jaded with the profession. She’s been much maligned by her male counterparts. She’s looking after her ailing mother Molly (Gemma Jones) and selling fossils from the fossil shop where they live. A working class woman working on the unforgiving and dangerous sea shore in Dorset, with virtually no education, thrust into being the breadwinner for the family at the age of 11 following her father’s death, and rising to become one of the leading but totally unrecognised palaeontologists of her generation, totally self-taught in a deeply patriarchal and class ridden society. Mary is remarkably stoic. She was born into a life of poverty, lived in a class-ridden, patriarchal society, and was very much sidelined. Her achievements were taken from her by her male counterparts; they would credit themselves for the majority of Mary’s finds. But she's determined, she's very headstrong, so she didn’t change who she's as a person. She's uneducated, but she learned from her father, who died when she was ten years old; it's because of the things he taught her that she found her first ichthyosaur at eleven. She has an inquisitive mind and a vast, knowledgeable brain, this self-taught ability that she has, and that she continues to learn throughout her life, is something we truly admired in her. There’s not a huge amount of literature on her, and we don’t know very much about her personal life, but one thing that we do know is that she would give the little that she has to the poor. Among the fossils she also find items that smugglers were hiding on the beach, in the caves. In those days you were supposed to turn over anything you found of a smuggled nature to the authorities; but Mary re-hides the things that she finds and then tell the poor people where they're! There's absolutely no evidence Mary ever has a relationship with anyone, whether that be heterosexual or same sex. She has close friendships with women and in the society of the time, where women are the subjects of men and where Mary has been virtually written out of history because of her gender and social status, it didn’t feel right to give her a relationship with a man. It's difficult to be open and vulnerable enough to love and be loved, particularly if you’ve been badly scarred by a past relationship. The film explores what this relationship might mean to someone who has not only been socially and geographically isolated but who has had to close off to any emotional life, where you replace affection and intimacy with work and duty. Where you’ve been overlooked and ignored your whole life because of your gender and social class. Given this world, would Mary be able to access how she feels for Charlotte? Would she be able to let her guard down to allow the possibility of something new and wonderful to enter her life? The film is fascinated by how these female relationships could flourish in this world, a world where the medical profession still believed women had no sexual pleasure organs and still 50 years before science categorised sexual orientation and then only for men. Through lighting, the film depicts the change Charlotte brings with her into this world, how she alters the environment, bringing her own sense of light into his dark, unemotional world. Charlotte has been married to Roderick Murchison for a couple of years at this point. She lost a child, and just feels empty and a bit useless, really. At that point in history the only purpose that a woman had was to marry, keep the home and have a child; so she feels fundamentally like a failure. It’s six months on from the death of her child, and she’s still in mourning, and hasn’t come out of that depression yet. So she’s brought to Lyme Regis, and she’s left there,,and she can think of nothing worse. Roderick leaves, and she and Mary don’t get on initially. But the safety of being with somebody who doesn’t want anything from her, isn’t asking anything of her, and allows her to break down and grieve and then start to come out of that a healthier stronger person. They really help to build one another up; and so get to a place where Charlotte still has this sadness, but she can live with it, and survive it. Her relationship with Roderick is really fraught at the beginning of the film; their marriage has become quite strained; they don’t have sex anymore, and even when they did, it's probably a very functional thing. What makes Charlotte quite unique, is that she’s somebody who's quite willing to take a back seat in terms of attention or being the one to shine. Her talent comes through in putting somebody else up on a pedestal and allowing everyone to see their greatness. She’s got a great sense of humility, and she’s a very giving person. She’s someone who has been very hurt and broken, but who still has a great capacity for love anddoesn’t shy away from that at all. From Charlotte’s point of view, she just wants to be held, and to have someone close to her physically who can at least try and understand what she’s going through. He’s probably going through the same thing, but they don’t know how to articulate it. There’s so much expected of them at that time, to just keep going and pretending everything’s fine, it puts a lot of strain on them. Then they've this time apart, and Charlotte comes out a different person in a way, a stronger person. And he’s gone off and had this adventure, where he’s been able to find his passion. The relationship between Mary and Molly, it’s quite tense. Mary’s mother has a hold over her. Mary does respect her, and doesn’t want to let her down, but at the same time she's held by this life, by the darkness of this world, and that’s largely to do with her mother being stuck in her ways and scared of change. Mary’s determination to carve out her own personality whist living with another powerful woman was quite difficult, but it’s also quite funny. There are funny moments, where you see Mary roll her eyes behind Molly’s back. At the beginning of the story Mary is tired, tired of living a hard impoverished life; increasingly impatient with her mother; disheartened with her profession and with trudging out on the cold beaches. Emotionally she’s really shut down, and she doesn’t expect life to deal her any nice cards at all. So the attachment she forms to Charlotte is really interesting. She doesn’t expect to fall in love with Charlotte at all, she initially finds her a bit silly and irritating, and doesn’t want to have to look after this tiny little sparrow of an upper class woman who wears the wrong shoes and puts on lace gloves to go fossiling. But her opinion of Charlotte really does change, in spite of herself. Even though they’re from completely different worlds, what you realise is that they’re equals in many ways. They’re both looking for affection; they’re both trapped in their own worlds, for a variety of reasons. Mary doesn’t have the finances to explore the world; but Charlotte is trapped by her finances, as the quiet little wife who’s very much kept. Mary brings out a feistier side in Charlotte, and Charlotte learns things about herself she never would have known were it not for Mary. She has lost a child, so she’s grieving; through friendship with Mary, she’s able to start thinking about other things, thinking beyond the grief. Her spirits lift, she gets healthier - and that’s all because of Mary. Charlotte is inspired by Mary; she’s never seen a woman like this, a strong woman who lives alone, who doesn’t have a husband to provide for her. For Mary, Charlotte is beautiful and delicate in a way that she herself isn’t. She’s got gnarled hands, she doesn’t look in the mirror, she barely takes a brush to her hair; so there are many things about Charlotte that she finds utterly fascinating. The way she smell of perfume and nice fabrics, it’s not Mary’s world at all. There’s an intoxicating aroma that follows Charlotte, and for Mary it’s something very new, something that she’s never imagined she’d stand that close to. Charlotte in turn feels like she’s almost got to live up to Mary. What Charlotte does that really helps Mary to come out of herself, and get rid of some of that coolness that she’s carried with her for so long, is that Charlotte won’t give up. She goes in with open arms, isn’t afraid to be vulnerable with Mary, and isn’t afraid to show what her feelings for her are. That catches Mary off-guard, but she’s forced into a place where she has to do the same. The physical environment is also very important, not just the exteriors but also the interiors. This world is defined by space Mary is working class and has little money, her living environment is small, with few windows, almost claustrophobic, dark and uncomfortable. In contrast, Charlotte’s interior world is flooded with light, space to escape, in other words there's choice within Charlotte’s world. It's fascinating to see each character inhabit each other’s interior and exterior live. "Ammonite" is a really good example of how the industry is changing. It’s a symbiotic change. For Mary, she ends up letting love in; and with Charlotte, there’s a sense of pride in work, an understanding of who she's, and how not to be defined by the norms of the day. "Ammonite" is shot in a linear, chronological way. Allowing each scene to impact on the next emotionally, like building blocks within the story. This is particularly challenging but it has paid off, given the strong emotional arc that's depicted at the heart of the film. The camera movement reflects not just the landscape but also the emotional state of the characters. An investigation into how to navigate a relationship from deeply lonely, disconnected beginnings. How we learn how to love again after being hurt. How we can be open enough to love and be loved. How we can accept and forgive and learn through the power of a true, intimate connection. But the world was a very different place: people’s emotions were much more hidden, things were just much more behind closed doors; religion played a much bigger part in everyday life. Throughout the history of cinema, there’s been a real enjoyment in finding romantic relationships through real people in history, from ‘Shakespeare In Love’ to ‘The King And I’. It marks our time that we can be free and open to the idea that there could have been a same sex relationship in Mary’s life, as there might have been a heterosexual relationship. It doesn’t matter where you come from, what life you're born into possibilities are out there, possibilities are endless. Being authentically true to yourself and using your voice to be who you want to be is more important than anything else in this world. Now more than ever we’re living in a time when women are absolutely obsessed with other women and when, more than what we look like or how we feel when we walk down the street, it’s about what women have to say. Women are greater together: the more strong female voices we've, the more togetherness we show, more examples we've of great women history, the more inspired we will feel as a community to support one another, to encourage one another and to inspire one another. For years we’ve been judged; still now we’re judged. We’re questioned all the time, we’re asked to justify our choices, why we wear what we wear, why we do our hair the way we do, why we work or don’t work. We’re seeing a new chapter in the history of women. We’re seeing much more equality in the workplace. We’re at a point now in society, and politics, and art, and film, where we’re definitely being given a platform to share stories we weren’t able to before. It shows a progression, and a real acceptance about the way we're now. People throughout history have been able to find a sense of self that’s not necessarily celebrated by the patriarchy of the time; people still live their lives.

(Release Info London schedule; March 26th, 2021, Curzon Home Cinema) https://www.curzonhomecinema.com/film/watch-stray-film-online "Stray" In "Stray", a trio of canine outcasts roam the streets of 'Istanbul'. Through their eyes and ears, we're shown an intimate portrait of the life of a city and it's people. In 'Istanbul', stray dogs are an everyday part of the fabric of the community, belonging to no one and everyone at the same time. Among them are the expressive, independent Zeytin; the friendly Nazar; and the shy puppy, Kartal. But 'The Turkish' city is home to human strays as well, as Zeytin and her friends bond with a trio of young 'Syrian' refugees. Through the eyes of three stray dogs wandering the streets of Istanbul, "Stray" explores what it means to live as a being without status or security. As they search for food and shelter, Zeytin, Nazar and Kartal embark on inconspicuous journeys through 'Turkish' society that allow us an  unvarnished portrait of human life, and their own canine culture. Zeytin, fiercely independent, embarks on solitary adventures through the city at night; Nazar, nurturing and protective, easily befriends the humans around her; while Kartal, a shy puppy living on the outskirts of a construction site, finds refuge with the security guards who care for her. The disparate lives of  Zeytin, Nazar and Kartal intersect when they each form intimate bonds with Jamil, Halil and Ali, a group of young 'Syrians', who share the streets with them. Whether they lead us into bustling streets or decrepit ruins, the gaze of these strays act as windows into the overlooked corners of society; women in loveless marriages,​ protesters without arms, ​refugees without sanctuary. Zeytin is the canine protagonist. She's an inconspicuous stray dog. The film follows Zeytin as she traverses across class, ethnic and gender lines in a way only stray dogs can. She's a character who fully envelopes us within her own nonhuman will, a quality that's vital to a story about dogs who, unlike pets,  are not only defined by their relationship to humans. She's quickly joined by  Nazar, another street dog. As it turned out, they're on the heels of a group of young men from Syria, Jamil, Halil and Ali, who are living on the streets as refugees in Turkey. The film follows them over months as they find shelter in construction sites and quiet sidewalks together. Despite the harshness of their circumstances, the dogs and boys have formed a makeshift family unit. The warmth and love emanating from their interdependent bond is deeply moving. ​Without the companionship of the dogs, 'The Syrian' boys feel adrift in a city not their own, and perhaps it's the same for Zeytin and Nazar. ​ The documentary is based on John Berger’s landmark essay 'Why Look At Animals' (1977). The essay speaks to the need of recognizing the destructive nature of our anthropocentrism. When our dog dies we feel a quiet need to suppress our grief at his passing. We're shocked that something as personal as how our heart responds to the death of a loved one could be shaped by an external politics that defined him or it as valueless. We also see how our moral conceptions of who or how much one matters can be in constant flux. This transformative moment is what propels "Stray’s" exploration into value, hierarchy, and sentience. "Stray" tracks the canines through the city’s streets, capturing their experiences and generating deep empathy without resorting to simple anthropomorphism. The point of view of the dogs allows a visually overwhelming critical observation, distant and finally moving, of a society, but easily extrapolated to any other, full of contrasts and inequalities, of moments of darkness and epiphany. Human beings live artificially and hypocritically and would do well to study the dog. Dogs keep watch over human beings, not to ensure that they do not lose their property, but rather that they do not get robbed of their integrity. We've to nuzzle the kind, bark at the greedy, and bite scoundrels. To become a true individual and proper human being, one must turn aside from conventional society and reject all it's values, to live in accordance with nature, and nature at a very basic level. The film is a critical  observation of human civilization through the unfamiliar gaze of dogs and a sensory voyage into new ways of seeing.   'Turkey' is a country whose history and relationship with strays is unique in the world. 'Turkish' authorities have tried to annihilate stray dogs since 1909, leading to mass killings of Istanbul’s street dogs for the last century. But widespread protests against these killings transformed 'Turkey' into one of the only countries where it's now illegal to euthanize or hold captive any stray dog. Every free-roaming dog today is an emblem of resistance, living  manifestations of compassion in the face of intolerance. It leads us into the cracks of human society, where community is formed in the crucibles of war and neglect, and where ​beings persist and survive even as they're relegated to the peripheries of society. It's a strenuous but literal way to challenge conventional modes of seeing and being in the world. "Stray" is an attempt to visually and aurally recenter the world around a nonhuman gaze. ​A.world in which human dialogue becomes radically secondary to heightened  frequencies, and where a classical score is set against the gritty, lived  experiences of those whom society has left behind. The film traverses a socio-cultural terrain in which for a moment, one nation becomes refuge for many others. When xenophobia, species destruction and nationalist sentiment are rising all around the world, "Stray" springs from these cracks in our anthropocentric modernity. It asks us to re-evaluate what it means that our streets are continuously emptied of everyone except those whom we’ve deemed to be it's legitimate citizens. "Stray" pushes the boundaries of the cinematic medium in order to explore and challenge unequal states of personhood, to expand viewer's circles of  moral and perceptual consideration beyond their own class, culture, and species.