Search Results

(FULL TIME Fri 26 May - Thu 1 Jun Cine Lumiere 11:00 · 20:35 17 Queensberry Pl, South Kensington, London SW7 2DW, United Kingdom) "Full Time" Julie (Laure Calamy) goes to great lengths to raise her two children in the countryside while keeping her job in a Parisian luxury hotel. When she finally gets a job interview for a position she had long been hoping for, a national strike breaks out, paralyzing the public transport system. The fragile balance that Julie has established is jeopardized. Julie then sets off on a frantic race against time, at the risk of faltering. "Full Time"  begins with a noise, the leading character Julie’s breathing, as she sleeps. The idea is to reveal the character gradually, from an intimate perspective, in a macroscopic, sensory manner, with this deep breathing that enwraps us, letting us know that we will be right by her side the entire film. Extremely close to her breathing, to the very grain of her skin. Also, it's a moment of calm before the storm. The film is like a long forward thrust and the first scene precedes the constant motion that ensues. We’re pretty much in the only point in time when Julie is at rest, in that single and transient moment when she can recharge her batteries. Afterwards, there will no longer be any respite for her. Through the lens of this woman, alone with her children, it's about the rhythm of our lives and our daily struggles. Just like Julie, we want to speak about the people we see on the train every day who gamble on living far from the capital to have a better quality of life. It’s a difficult balance to strike and not everyone manages to find the way to make it work. It's difficult to keep the character’s bright composure in spite of the spell she is going through. The fact is that we know very little about this woman’s life, except that she's in the moment, yet relentlessly thinking of how to make things work from one day to the next. This woman is going through a rather chaotic chapter in her life, that Americans would sum up in the expression the perfect storm, meaning when you run into every possible and conceivable problem at once and you've to find ways to solve everything. It's a sensory film. Through the creation of a musical backdrop echoing Julie’s stressful daily life. The electro soundtrack reflects the character’s inner throbbing, the tempo and the repetitiveness of her own life. It’s like her inner music, a succession of waves transporting us into her experience. This way, everything that surrounded her became off screen sensory matter. It's a simple means to add density to the city, and make Paris more anxiety-inducing. For this is how Julie feels about being in town, instantly receiving its full- blown violence every time she steps off the train. This also explains why she wishes for another life for her children. She wants to maintain, regardless of the cost for her, her safe harbor in a more peaceful territory where the prevalent rhythm is less dehumanized. She’s a warrior. For her every means is acceptable, which sometimes includes small arrangements with the truth. Julie is an everyday heroine. We see her with her children, her colleagues, her friends, in her job interview. Each time, she isn’t quite the same woman and it's the sum of these women which tells us who she's. She has her own shortcomings, can be her own worst enemy, and can be tenacious to the point of obstinacy. She's both strong and fallible. Julie is highly physical, and you can feel her experience in the way she occupies the space. Because of the messes she has to deal with, Julie must constantly be one step ahead, planning for the future; just like a chess player, she said always several moves ahead. Paris is filmed in a rather unusual way, sharp and metallic although it essentially a mineral city. The urban surroundings aren’t typically Paris, and could have been any other large city. The inspiration comes from the way New York was filmed in certain 1970s movies. Paris hues are in orangish-gray tones, while my decision was to make them colder and cruder, as this corresponds well with the state of mind Julie is in the minute she sets foot in this hostile territory. "Full Time" is interested in the idea of repetitiveness in everyday life, having to repeat the same gestures endlessly at work and at home, as though caught in perpetual motion. The job shows us the extent to which Julie is attached to performance and perfection. The position of head chambermaid in a luxury hotel is not simple. There are specific skills and knowledge involved, precise tasks and gestures, and codes one needs to abide by. The film takes place during a massive nation-wide strike that spreads through all sectors of activity. Everything starts breaking down everywhere, in the image of what's happening to the leading character. The film wants the individual and collective struggles to follow parallel courses for us to gradually understand that they're connected, that they tell the same story, that one is the consequence of the other. Julie is stuck in a societal blind spot. She belongs to a category of workers who are the most vulnerable, for whom going on strike or having any form of representation is pretty much impossible. We remembered how, during the strike in Paris in 1995, we'd been very impressed with the way people who lived in and out of Paris showed great solidarity and found ways to function differently in their urban environment, walking, hitchhiking, helping one another. "Full Time" also plays with the rhythm of the day and above all that of the night. Living far from your place of work means leaving early and coming home late. Establishing Julie’s departures and returns home when it’s dark outside allowed me to convey the very long days, to broach the child-care logistics issues as well as the downsides of life in the country. This relation to time also gives the film the possibility to have the sun rise and set in public transportation, thus easily structuring days that succeed one another at an increasingly fast pace, without losing track of the story. Written by Gregory Mann .

Hereditary is directed by first time director Ari Aster – who proves himself a brilliant director, creating a film that doubled my heart rate and made everyone leave the cinema with their jaws on the ground. The film is without a doubt something that horrors of recent years have been missing; it pays homage to many greats such as The Exorcist and Rosemary's Baby and puts its demonic twist on it. The film centres around a conspiracy: after the death of the grandma, mysterious occurrences begin to happen. Bit-by-bit, each character (excluding the father) becomes more and more twisted – little signs appear, forewarning us of the horror that is about to come. The girl, Charlie, is an abnormal girl: lonely and quite, and when things go south we begin to see the whole picture. The film has been perfectly crafted, inserting elements that foreshadow greater ideas – with the open-ended way the film cuts to credits you are left in shock; there is no one answer to what happened, rather it’s left up to your interpretation. The film tackles the idea of demons, hell and spirits, sprinkling familiar ideas throughout, but the direction, visuals and sound are remarkable. An irritating ticking is always present in the house, whenever the film cuts elsewhere, there is some sort of foley sound to create tension, which the film instils so perfectly. Toni Collette (Annie) puts on the performance of her life. She plays the mum – plagued with troubles and loss – we learn it all stems from her mother who leaves a cryptic letter; it is just prior to that that things go the wrong way. She is an artist, she has been commissioned to re-create scenes from her life – this only emphasises the dark and creepy nature of what surrounds her, as most images are rather terrifying. One element that some may not have caught, that a few others and I did, was Annie's nightmares were signals – implanted subconsciously. Throughout her entire life, she has sleepwalked, and in nightmares and reality, she has attempted to kill her son, because deep down she knew what would happen. The idea of a boy being the host body was implanted early on when it was briefly referenced, the grandmother always wanted Charlie to be a boy and now she is gone, the sacrifices were worth it in the eyes of the maddened grandmother. Hereditary is without a doubt the horror we need, and I think it could be up for Academy recognition when it comes to next year – this is a film that cannot be missed. 5 Stars rating (5/5) Written by Ben Rolph thenamesradical@gmail.com

When Steven Grant (Oscar Isaac), a mild-mannered gift-shop employee, becomes plagued with blackouts and memories of another life, he discovers he has dissociative identity disorder and shares a body with mercenary Marc Spector (Oscar Isaac). As Steven/Marc’s enemies converge upon them, they must navigate their complex identities while thrust into a deadly mystery among the powerful gods of Egypt. ★★★★ Directed by: #Mohamed Diab #JustinBenson #AaronMoorhead Produced by: #KevinFeige #LouisD’Esposito #VictoriaAlonso #GrantCurtis #BradWinderbaum #OscarIsaac #MohamedDiab #JeremySlater Starring: #OscarIsaac #MayCalamawy #KarimElHakim #F.MurrayAbraham #EthanHawke Released: 30th March 2022 Film review by: Ahmed Abbas | Published: 29th March 2022 | Edited: 5th April 2022 It was December 2015 when Oscar Isaac’s first appearance as a Marvel character in the X-Men: Apocalypse teaser trailer was ridiculed. And yet, the special screening of the first two episodes of Marvel Studios’ Moon Knight was met with a standing ovation. Isaac’s iteration of the Steven Grant-Marc Spector biformity trades the bright blue makeup of the X-Men villain for an awkward, yet endearing gift shop worker conjoined to a brash, unprincipled mercenary. Moon Knight takes us on a journey with Grant as he uncovers his newfound, suppressed personality and unravels the never-ending train of troubles his alter ego precipitated. The series first portrays Spector as an invader of this innocent man’s body, before subtly hinting that this narrative may in fact, be the inverse. Isaac’s performance of these polar opposite men surrendering control of their body to each other, is a performance unparalleled. The “bodymates” are juxtaposed in all manners but must come to terms with each other, as their shared body can only be controlled by one of them at any given time. Stephen’s gentle nature is exhibited by the care of his goldfish, while Marc’s brash psyche is evinced by the aftermath of Steven’s blackouts. The events of the first four episodes have the pair forgo their differences, but place their ethics as a major dilemma between them – Spector has no qualms with his barbarity, while Grant takes great issue with his body being used for lethal acts – a contention the series seems poised to resolve in the episodes to come. From the opening scenes, we waste no time with unnecessary scenes and immediately meet our antagonist, and protagonist(s). Arthur Harrow’s (Ethan Hawke) introduction in the opening moments is an automatic improvement to the pacing of Marvel shows, as Moon Knight opts to reject the slow burn approach of many of Marvel’s previous outings. We have an unprecedented four-way relationship between Grant, Spector, Khonshu, and Harrow, where each character in this relationship acts as both an antagonist and a protagonist for the other three at various times within the series’ first four episodes. Ethan Hawke’s tremendous performance takes full advantage of this, as the empathetic and apologetic identity he adopts while he drains the life from a supposedly innocent, elderly woman leaves viewers unsure of how they should feel – his charisma is welcoming and evokes trust, while his actions say otherwise. This is even replicated with one-half of the main character, as Harrow appeals to Grant’s timid nature. Throughout the four episodes, you simply cannot tell whether Harrow truly cares for Grant, or whether the character is performing to gain Steven’s trust and remove his rival’s most powerful weapon. This is a masterclass on display, where both writing and acting have synergised to deliver a character who compels the audience to undergo a prescribed ride of emotions. Powerful performances are not exclusive to Isaac and Hawke. Moon Knight is among the better-cast Marvel projects, as the entire ensemble gives it their all. No better actor could have been chosen for each role, and even more encouraging is that the show features a consortium of Egyptian performers, which is appropriate for the extent of the show set in Egypt. May El Calamawy, an Egyptian-Palestinian actress, is the most notable example of this, and actually used her experiences for reference, allowing her to offer insight into her character and uplift her character on paper as well as on-screen, transforming her into the heart of the show. The effort given by the cast is reflected across the board. This is evident from the show’s visuals, as the cinematography is among the best I’ve ever seen. The marriage between the director's & cinematographer’s artistic styles and the production designer’s craft birthed a revolutionary mechanism of storytelling. If one were to watch Moon Knight on mute, the main character’s dissociative identity disorder is visually conveyed just as well as it is written. The set design is incredible, employing an abundance of reflective surfaces as apparatuses for the two main characters to perceptibly confront each other. Moreover, the practical design of locations ranging from the streets of Brixton to the tombs of Egypt are unbelievably believable, and remarkable work was put in (as can be read in the press conference breakdown). Mohamed Diab’s (executive producer and director) insistence on minimalizing the use of green screen is apparent and sets Moon Knight apart from any Marvel production. Moon Knight effortlessly manages to evolve the standard of humour in the Marvel Cinematic Universe (MCU), whilst also creating Marvel Studios’ most mature project yet. Within the first half of the debut episode, viewers are treated to more blood within a single shot than has been seen in the entirety of Phase 4 to date. That is not to say that Moon Knight is overly violent, but rather that previous efforts have felt somewhat suppressed – it is a breath of fresh air in the MCU. The humour itself is also situational and not laboured – the title character isn’t going to take a break from a life-and-death moment to make a gag to the viewers. Dotted throughout, are plenty of horror-like segments, ranging from the display of Khonshu, the God of the Moon and of Vengeance, as a grand and powerful figure that is to be feared, to the numerous, true horror scenes in a single episode, which were tense and genuinely superior to sequences within several horror pictures in recent years. Moon Knight learns from Marvel’s past, taking what worked from Marvel’s most acclaimed projects, and combining them into one smorgasbord of a series. It fuses the best parts of FX’s Legion, Marvel’s Daredevil, and Marvel’s The Punisher, incorporating such genres as adventure, horror, action, fantasy, and psychological thriller, and it just happens to feature the “Marvel Studios” banner above its title. Moon Knight is not another superhero piece to be skipped or saved to the ‘watch later’ category; it is among the best of the comic book genre and is one to be viewed and discussed by all on a weekly basis. Moon Knight has all the makings of an iconic show, and if it sticks the landing in its final two episodes, it’ll be placed among the ranks of the “greatest shows of all time” – Marvel’s first masterpiece could arise. Bold, sincere, and surreal, Moon Knight is a complete reinvention of the MCU, taking viewers on a psychedelic expedition inside the broken mind of Marvel’s latest, most lovable protagonist. Moon Knight is available to stream now on Disney+.

Cinema, an illustrious industry that has spanned a century. It has raised Hollywood and brought the stars we hold dear into the spotlight and let them shine brighter than thought possible. People like Audrey Hepburn, Robin Williams and Tom Hanks have long had their names in lights, and captured the hearts and emotions of the public for decades and shall live forever to the fans of film. However, in recent years the ticket sales have been waning, and the sales of home formats have been on the decline due to the growing popularity of streaming services. To many it seems like soon the traditionalized way of experiencing the film industry may come to an end for those films that are not a part of a longer on going “franchised universe”. Many would rather see a reboot, sequel, prequel or spin-off that Hollywood likes to churn out, than something original. I in Shakespearean fashion, say “neigh! The art of cinema shall not die!” and raise my sword like He-man. This is where I would like to admit that I had once perpetuated the collapse of the film industry. I’d have happily have watched a 67th installment of the Marvel franchise than something with substance and depth, i.e Lady Bird. In fact, growing up I didn’t get to explore cinema to much extent. I had never watched Mrs Doubtfire. I had never watched a film that was in black and white. I still have not seen E.T. As a child I visited the cinema to watch the Harry Potter films, and had a select set of VHS tapes that my parents had bought my brother and I to watch, which included The Lion King, Aladdin, and the Mighty Morphin Power Rangers Movie. I can tell you that as a child, when you have watched the Mighty Morphin Power Rangers Movie for the 100th time you end up thinking it is a good film…until you watch it on streaming services as a hungover undergraduate student and realise it is rather hilariously terrible. In recent months I took to writing a list of cinema and cult classics that I am still working through (yes E.T. is on the list, don’t @ me) and I have been to the cinema more than I think most people have been in their entire life times. I also at one point in time studied the great Mickey Mouse subject of Media Studies and therefore have opinions. And so it was decreed that from here on out I intend to write reviews of films that I watch, be it from the ever-growing list of well-respected cinema, or new releases. To begin, let’s talk about last years’ film everybody couldn’t possibly have forgotten because we were all constantly reminded about how we could never forget it: Mother! (2017) which was released on DVD and Blu-ray recently. Put back to basics, Mother! (2017, directed and written by Darren Aronofsky) is a film that follows Jennifer Lawrence and Javier Bardem as a nameless couple. Whilst Jennifer single handedly renovates their house that comes straight out of a post apocalyptic version of Grand Designs into a paradise, Javier is a writer with writers block. From no where, Jennifer and Javier’s desolate sanctuary is intruded by Ed Harris, and then his wife, Michelle Pfeiffer who has the best acting work in the film….and of course their two sons…oh and can’t forget all the people who attend one of their sons’ wake….and then what can only be described as the population of a small town who all love Javiers’ work…none of whom have any character names. In the sudden surge of popularity Javier relishes the new found glory by drawing religious symbols on foreheads and being worshipped, where as a now heavily pregnant Jennifer becomes increasingly stressed and anxious to get these people to leave so she can presumably ponder whether to paint the living room sickly green or a dull version of urine yellow once again. However, as the movie spirals and twists Jennifer becomes meek, loses control of the house, which descends into anarchy and finally finds a backbone once it is too late. In my own opinion, Aronofsky’s work can be rather hit and miss. Requiem for a Dream (2000) is still talked about and held in such regard to this day. Black Swan (2010) gives grace and elegance juxtaposed with harsh and dark undertones for something even your own mum will point to when you pick up a copy of Mother! and say “ooooh! The director of Black Swan, that was a good film Dan!” (yeah, thanks for the input mum). Noah (2014) on the other hand falls rather flat. Mother! resides somewhere in the middle territory of these oppositions. It is not an awful film, but I wouldn’t characterize it as being good. Even just in technical aspects Mother! is all over the place. Aronofsky’s use of colour in the film intends to draw you towards Jennifer Lawrence’s character and highlight the dark undertones of everything we see in the film from beginning to end, but Aronofsky shoots on 16mm for the film so the intensity and focus that comes with shooting in digital or 35mm is lost. I note that as a great shame as, apart from Michelle Pfeiffer, the unfinished house is the best character in the film and would be amazing to see the intricate details of. In terms of plot, Aronofsky’s work on Mother! definitely has quite a clear and obvious viewpoint that he is trying to up hold in regards to both religion and the environment. In the subtext of the film Javier Bardem is the big man himself, God, Jennifer Lawrence is Mother Nature, and the house she tends to is representative of the Earth. Therefore, the intruders who cause the destruction to Lawrence’s house are symbolic of humanity, beginning with Ed Harris and Michelle Pfeiffer as Adam and Eve, and the effect we have with climate change. Although this sounds like quite the interesting concept for a film, Aronofsky is very heavy handed with the underlying message. To call this message “subtext” is very generous on my part as Aronofsky has about as much subtlety as someone shouting “This is that point of the film!” over and over into your face. In addition Aronofsky litters the film with plot points that do not come to any fruition. For example, through out the film Jennifer Lawrence has to take a urine coloured elixir (bright urine this time as to not match the walls) that is essentially a mystery powder and water, so that she can stop what appears to be abdominal pains. Do we find out what that powder is? No. Do we know what the abdominal pains are caused by or what they symbolise? No. Could she take a Gaviscon instead? Probably. It is apparent in the promotions for the film, and in the themes and structure, that Aronofsky takes a lot of inspiration for the film from Rosemary’s Baby (1968, directed by Roman Polanski). Mother! uses imagery reminiscent of Rosemary’s Baby for the film poster, and in viewing is many ways a reflection of the thriller classic. Where as Rosemary’s Baby shows a mortal husband betray his wife in service to Satan, Mother inverts this to a Godly husband betraying his wife in service to a mortal congregation. With this we are left to question whether we are the monster we truly fear, or whether the hubris of religion creates the monster for us to cower from. Where Mother! also differs from Rosemary’s Baby is in pacing and extremity. Mother stays at the same pace for a long time of just asking “what’s going on?” and then quickly escalates to what some would describe as “What the actual fuck?” (Thanks random teenager in the Chicago Arclight screening I originally went to). Rosemary’s Baby, which the film actually takes from however is a slow progression of clues, events and misleads that culminate in an unsettling conclusion, and where Mother! resolves in a series of violent acts aimed at a modern day audience that bores of anything without action, Rosemary’s Baby leaves the viewer trapped in thought as much as Rosemary is trapped in the film. Overall I would give Darren Aronofsky’s Mother! (2017) 6 Michelle Pfeiffer’s “special family recipe” lemonades out of 10. Although the film has some flaws, it remains perfectly watchable, has a predominantly good cast, and some twists in the story that can be commended.

Stephen Wight & Aisling Bea - Dir. Jack Carrivick

(BFI London Film Festival, BFI Southbank, Belvedere Rd, Bishop's, London SE1 8XT, United Kingdom) 12 October 2020 17:40, BFI Southbank, NFT2 12 October 2020 17:50, BFI Southbank, NFT3 12 October 2020 18:00, BFI Southbank, NFT1 12 October 2020 18:30, BFI Player 13 October 2020 20:40, BFI Southbank, NFT2 13 October 2020 20:45, BFI Southbank, NFT1 13 October 2020 20:50, BFI Southbank, NFT3 https://www.bfi.org.uk/london-film-festival/screenings/undine "Undine" Undine (Paula Beer) is a historian who works as a museum guide in Berlin on Berlin's urban development. She knows all about 'The Humboldt Forum', and has the knack of choosing just the right blouse and suit. She has a small apartment at 'Alexanderplatz', a master‘s degree in history, and a freelance contract. But underneath the appearance of her modern citylife lurks an old myth; if the man she loves leaves her, the ancient myth catches up with her. Undine has to kill the man who betrays her and return to the water she once came from. And yet, time and again, her gaze wanders over to the courtyard café at the museum to see if he's there, or is still there, or if he’s there again. She's nonchalantly beautiful, and the way she imparts her knowledge about the city that was built on a swamp is as professional as it's graceful. But when her lover Johannes (Jacob Matschenz) is leaving her, Undine’s world is collapsing. So when he leaves her for another woman, Undine thinks she has no choice, until in the moment of betrayal, she meets Christoph (Franz Rogowski), an industrial driver. Undine defies her role as a powerless and spurned woman and falls in love anew, with Christoph, who dives into the sunken world of a reservoir. This is a new, happy and innocent love filled with curiosity and trust. But when Christoph starts to feel that Undine is running away from something, she has to face her curse once and for all. She doesn‘t want to lose this love. The magic has gone. 'You humans! You monsters!' Thus begins Ingeborg Bachmann’s narration 'Undine Leaves' published in 1961. 'Undine' is the betrayed woman of the waters. According to the myth, she lives in a lake in the forest. A man who’s fatefully enamored with a woman, whose love is unrequited and hopeless, who no longer knows what to do with himself or his feelings, who suffers absolute despair can enter the forest, go to the banks of the lake and cry out 'Undine’s' name. And she’ll come. And love him. Their love is a pact that may never be betrayed. And if it's betrayed, then the man must die. Then it comes to pass that he who loves and is loved seems easy and free, lovable and desirable once more. In the myth, the previously hopelessly adored woman suddenly becomes interested in the man again. And he leaves Undine to marry her, his first love. On the night of their wedding, Undine enters the bedroom and embraces the man in a bubble of water that’s going to drown him. She sweps him to death at the scuttling servants before disappearing into the lake in the forest. She has just been left and betrayed by someone whose name is Johannes. Going by the myth, she would take revenge on Johannes and kill him, but Undine defies the myth. She doesn’t want to return to the curse, to the lake in the forest. She doesn’t want to leave. She wants to love. She meets someone else. "Undine" choses fairytale-material as a point of departure. It's a story about love, but an impossible love, or a damaged one, or one that perhaps evolves. You see how love develops and remains. Undine calls out to the servants of the faithless man whom she has killed. Undine doesn’t want to go back to the forest lake. That she doesn’t want to kill. Undine is one such character who criticizes her curse too soon and is forced to fight. When she leaves Johannes, the man who betrayed her, she’s free. She goes home, lies down in bed and listens to 'Stayin Alive', the song to which she was resuscitated by the man who loves her. That’s when she’s free. But it’s at just this moment that the curse again takes effect. When you feel your most liberated, that’s when you’re most vulnerable. The curse of the old world demands an impossible price for her freedom. But for this instant it’s worth it. She holds on to this moment of freedom so that what she experienced remains present. There’s a man, Christoph, who’s the first to love her for herself, and it’s a love she’ll fight for. And we watch her realize this dream. She’s already human, she wants to remain human. When she goes diving with Christoph, she suddenly vanishes as if the water are pulling her into her element, she remembers nothing and says, 'no, I don’t want to come back here again'. But the enchanted world, the mythical world, won’t let go. It sticks to her, it’s brutal, it pulls her under. The myths and fairytales, men’s myths, leave Undine a pitiful dearth of leeway. Undine is a woman who needs to escape the work of male projection. A larger part of the film plays underwater in scenes with their very own magic. In the water, you can still feel remains of the old magic. The lake is not an enchanted one in the woods but rather a reservoir somewhere between romanticism and industrialization. It contains both the dammed water, that energy, and a flooded valley where a village once stood. Below is this mysterious, hidden life, the old stories, and above is modernity, steel; yet both are in the same space. And these cursed creatures, the stuff of fairy tales and myths who go about their mischief down below, feature as remnants in the film. The dam at dawn, the underwater world, the sunken city, the catfish. That all looks great, and it draws you in immediately. But the apartment where Undine lives isn’t an organically grown, enchanted place, it’s only enchanted by their love. Two lovers who manage to enchant an ugly place with their love. It has this 'Jules Verne' character to it, the adventure, the people welding underwater in a city that actually went under at this spot. History is changing, as are the legends and myths. Undine is no longer the Undine of 'Fouqué', but a modern woman, albeit one to whom the curse of the past still sticks. And she does something that is not part of the old undine myth, she departs. She doesn’t serve the myth of the past but destroys it. And there’s no such thing as an unpolitical story. The political always slips into the narrative. Two perspectives are important in "Undine"; Undine’s and the world’s. The film is the story of Undine, and when she has left the world it becomes the seeker’s story, Christoph’s. And if there’s the world and someone who looks at the world and goes through the world, you essentially only have those two perspectives: one of the seeing person and one of their view on the world. There are very few long shots, at the dam wall, of the models. The most important thing is to consider who’s narrating. Who’s this about, who’s watching here? That’s the crucial question in cinema. Is the camera watching, is it taking part? We've this scene where Undine and Christoph are lying on a wooden jetty and kissing, it’s straight out of a 'French Impressionist' painting, a 'Manet' painting. And it’s by contrasting his memory of the romantic image from earlier that the loss of the woman he loves becomes clear. His loneliness becomes apparent through the recollection of that image. We're looking at this 'Manet' picture, and it’s a narrative image, but that’s because it's narrator appears twice. 'French Impressionism' was a more important reference point than 'German Romanticism'. If you think about it carefully, all the shots at the lake are basically pictures that, over a detour via 'French Impressionism', once more illustrate 'German Romanticism'. But this is precisely not 'Caspar David Friedrich'; these are not the images of 'German Romanticism', but rather that’s already been broken with light, with resolution. That’s probably why we look at more pictures by 'Manet" than by 'Caspar David Friedrich'. But we can’t quite get away from 'German Romanticism', try as we might. So we've to approach it from a different angle, via 'Edward Hopper', via cinema. Motifs relating to the 'Undine' myth can already be found back in 'Greek Mythology'. The word 'Undenae' appears for the first time in a script of Paracelsus published posthumously in 1566: 'Undine', from 'The Latin Unda', wave, is a water sprite in human form who can only attain an immortal soul through marriage to a human. Should she come back into contact with her element after her marriage, she must return to it. Should her husband remarry, he must die. Paracelsus made reference to 'The French Melusine Saga' (12th century) and 'The German Stauffenberg Saga' (14th century). In 'The 19th Century', 'German Romanticism' returned to the subject, as can be seen in 'The Boy‘s Magic Horn' (1806–1808). In 1811, Friedrich De La Motte 'Fouqué' published the fairytale novella 'Undine', which cites 'Paracelus' and 'Egolf Of Stauffenberg' as sources and which in turn became the inspiration for countless variations and reworkings. 'Goethe' praised the text but made it clear that he would have made more of the material; 'Lortzing' (1816) and 'E.T.A. Hoffmann' (1845) adapted it for the opera. New interpretations can be found in the fairytales of Hans-Christian Andersen; 'The Little Mermaid' (1836), of Oscar Wilde; 'The Fisherman And His Soul' (1891). In Jean Giraudoux‘s 'Ondine (1939), the water spirits engender 'Undine‘s' husband‘s death and ensure that she won‘t be able toremember him. As for cinema, Neil Jordan was the last to adapt the material in "Odine" (2009). Berlin is no myths of it's own, it’s an assembled, modern city. As a former trade city, it always imported it's myths. We imagined that with the draining of the swamps, all the myths and stories the travelling merchants brought here are lying around as if on mudflats and slowly drying out. At the same time, Berlin is a city that's erasing more and more of it's own history. 'The Wall', that characterizing element of Berlin, was torn down in a very brief period. Our way of dealing with the past and with history in Berlin is brutal. "Undine" reworks the myth of the mysterious water spirit as a modern fairy-tale in a disenchanted world. The film deeplies assures work reimagines this legend by way of a new cinematic vision, in which precise everyday gestures are combined with ghostly hyperrealism. The story of a life-or-death love, splendidly and effortlessly told. The fairy tales you remember, the myths that were read to you by your mother; you don’t have to reread these. Their world view is stored in your memory. The condensation, the abridgement, all that's in the narration. The fairytales that are recorded by 'The Brothers Grimm' and so on had been passed on orally, being told and retold, and, at some point, changing more and more. But a few things remained the same. Cinema is more akin to this oral tradition than it's to research in the state library.

(London Film Festival, October 4th, 2019, Curzon Soho, 99 Shaftesbury Ave, Soho, London W1D 5DY, United Kingdom, 10:00 am) https://whatson.bfi.org.uk/lff/Online/default.asp?BOparam::WScontent::loadArticle::permalink=coldcasehammarskjold "Cold Case Hammarskjöld" The documentary tries to solve the mysterious death of Dag Hammarskjöld. As the investigation closes in, the film discovers a crime far worse than killing 'The Secretary-General Of The United Nations'. In 1961, United Nations secretary-general Dag Hammarskjöld’s plane mysteriously crashed, killing Hammarskjöld and most of the crew. With the case still unsolved 50-plus years later, the film leads us down an investigative rabbit hole to unearth the truth. Scores of false starts, dead ends, and elusive interviews later, the film begins to sniff out something more monumental than anything we initially imagined. In a signature agitprop style, the documentary challenges the very nature of truth by performing the role of truth seeker. As the film uncovers a critical secret that could send shockwaves around the world, we realize that sometimes absurdity and irony are the emboldening ingredients needed to confront what’s truly sinister. When the film opens it's around midnight on September 18th, 1961, a small plane flying over a remote part of 'Central Africa'. Suddenly the lights at a nearby airfield go out and we hear the sound of another plane. Then something sounding like gunfire breaks out and Hammarskjöld's plane crashes, killing all 16 people on board, including 'The 'U.N. Secretary-General' who's en route to negotiations for a cease-fire in the ongoing 'Congo Crisis'. The accident is officially blamed on pilot error, however rumors have persisted for decades that it's a well-planned assassination. The wreckage is buried a few days after the crash. Convinces that it's nearby, the jaunty pair outfit themselves with shovels, a metal detector and pith helmets and set off to find it. It's supposedly a remnant of Hammarskjöld's plane, found at the crash site. It's apparently unremarkable, but there's one thing that seemed unusual; a series of perfectly round, irregularly spaced holes. Could they be bullet holes? But just as the search seems promising, local authorities abruptly withdraw permission to dig. But who wants Hammarskjöld dead, and why? What possibly go wrong there? What's the meaning of the mysterious playing card found intact on Hammarskjöld's partially scorched body? Why's an unassuming young marine biologist murdered? What did witnesses see in the sky that night? Could it all be an elaborate hoax perpetrated by an eccentric, highly skilled propagandist? The story begins to gain momentum with the discovery of a secretive figure named Keith Maxwell, who styled himself 'Commodore Of SAIMR'. Dressing exclusively in crisp naval whites or, for special occasions, the brass-buttoned uniform, cutlass and three-corner hat of an '18th-Century' admiral, Maxwell sometimes claimed to be a doctor and ran medical clinics throughout poor black areas in African offering low-cost health care and vaccinations. Could he be the key to unlocking all of 'SAIMR's Secrets'?  Now deceased, Maxwell left behind a half-finished, somewhat fictionalized memoir called 'The Story Of My Life' that seemed too improbable to be true. 'SAIMR' is the successor to a 184-year-old organization started by British mariners. Maxwell was a stocky middle-aged man with tousled hair, tinted aviator glasses and a blank expression. A retired doctor whom Maxwell tried unsuccessfully to recruit remembers him as a flamboyant but harmless member of a group dedicated to finding sunken treasure. Maxwell was some kind of demonic clown, a kook. He had the resources to use violence and to supply weapons. He was financed and directed by 'MI6, British Intelligence'. The slow, steady crescendo comes to an abrupt climax when a man named Alexander Jones provides by far the film's most compelling testimony. Jones not only admits to being an 'Ex-SAIMR' operative, he's eager to share what he knows. Jones verifies the names of 'SAIMR' members and allows himself to be taped making incendiary allegations, describing the organization's mission as overthrowing governments and taking over countries. Murder and mayhem are a means to eradicate black Africans and maintain white rule, he claims. The group is so secretive that the 5,000 or more members are unlikely to even know of each other. Jones describes Maxwell as a very dangerous man, someone exquisitely manipulative, charismatic and dedicated to eliminating black Africans through non-militaristic means. In the late 1990s, he claims, Maxwell's clinics are a cover for his most sinister plan, infecting black Africans with 'HIV' using contaminated vaccines. Black people have got no rights, they need medical treatment. There's a white philanthropist coming in and saying, 'you know, I'll open up these clinics and I'll treat you'. The more pieces of the puzzle the film fits together, the more clear it becomes just how many more are missing. A Swedish aristocrat and lifetime public servant, Hammarskjöld was elected as 'The U.N.'s' second 'Secretary-General' in 1953. A seasoned bureaucrat tasked with overhauling the burgeoning organization's administrative capacities, he was a compromise candidate between 'Cold War' foes. His aggressive anti-colonial stance took the world by surprise as he attempted to help black Africans reclaim their countries from their foreign corporate masters. The quiet technocrat had become a flaming idealist and an inconvenience to those in power. Chief on his to-do list was 'Congo", then beginning to emerge from decades of brutal subjugation begun by 'The Belgian King Leopold II.' In 'The Late 19th Century', 'Leopold' ruthlessly siphoned off untold millions of dollars' worth of ivory, rubber and precious minerals for his own enrichment, while virtually enslaving the native population. 'The 20th Century' brought corporations like 'Union Minière', which continued to loot the country's wealth and exploit black Africans. In 1961, Hammarskjöld was attempting to bring a series of civil wars in 'Congo' to an end. As emerging African nations became another 'Cold War' proxy battleground between 'The U.S'. and it's allies on one side, and 'The Soviet Union' on the other, Hammarskjöld's 'U.N.' was becoming increasingly troublesome to both factions. If he succeeded in his goals, the map of 'Africa' would change and rule would be restored to black Africans, allowing them to define their own futures. Instead, the battle for control would rage on for decades more, and much of the area's wealth would continue to slip away. On the night of September 18th, 1961, 'UN Secretary-General' Dag Hammarskjöld's plane crashes under suspicious circumstances in 'The Congolese' province of 'Katanga'. Swedish Hammarskjöld was in favor of 'The Independence Of Congo' which had not made him popular with 'The Western' superpowers on 'The African Continent'. The mysterious crash was never fully explained. The tragic death of Dag Hammarskjöld remains one of the greatest mysteries of 'The 20th Century'. Over 50 years later the film tries to discover the truth about this cold case once and for all. The film trecks across 'The African Brousse' in search of answers. To try and solve a case that has baffled people for decades. What begins as the unraveling of murder plot slowly turns into a true thriller that surprises you at every turn. Even today, there are many questions and conspiracy theories. Why did the plane carrying the world's highest ranking diplomat crash in Africa? Was it shot down? And if so, by whom? Was Hammarskjöld a victim of 'The Cold War' between 'The US' and 'The Soviet Union'? Was he a thorn in the side of the former colonial powers due to his support for the newly independent African states? Could Hammarskjöld have been murdered by powerful political opponents? And who left the ace of spades death card on his body? From 'Zambia' and 'South Africa' to 'The U.K'., 'The U.S'., 'Russia', 'Spain' and beyond, the film conducts an estimated 50 interviews with witnesses both central and peripheral to the tale, leading to a constantly widening maze. The film ends up in a web of deception, betrayal and more questions. A journalist should not wish for his journalism to be flawed, but due to the horror of what he discovers. We've secretly been hoping that it all would turn out to be a misunderstanding. Unfortunately, that's not the case. The search, which long led nowhere, suddenly kuncovers crimes that are much more recent and much more terrifying. With the twists and turns of an elegantly plotted murder mystery and the intrigue of an international espionage thriller, "Cold Case Hammarskjöld"  winds it's way through three continents and almost seven years of investigative reporting. Tracking down Belgian mercenaries, telling tales of evil men who dress in white, the ace of spades found at crime scenes, rumors about secret societies. It's a unique and effective way of visualizing colonialism and racial relations in Africa. The villain only wore white, but also, in a strange way, white is the color of power in this story, so it accentuates the interracial relationship in a powerful cinematic effect. Having difficulties at first and having leads go cold is good for the narrative. If everything is perfectly clear from the beginning, that's not interesting. And that's the way it played out in reality. It's a weird outfit, like a cross between 'Hezbollah' and 'Scientology'. Perhaps there's a successor out there. Some of what we discovered we know is very real. But some of it's very difficult to prove.

Well, here is the film that started an empire. Not only was it Walt Disney's first foray into feature length animated films, it was also the first full length cell animated film ever attempted. I suppose it's needless to say that the gamble paid off for him. Especially when you take into account the fact that Disney, after just buying 20th Century Fox entertainment, now technically owns about a third of the entertainment industry. Walt Disney first came across the tale of Snow White when he was about fifteen years of age after reading The Brothers Grimm tale of the same name. He later stated that he couldn't get the story out of his head and he would be constantly playing the story over in his mind. After the success of his Mickey Mouse and the Silly Symphonies series, Walt pooled everyone together and started work on Snow White in early 1934. The film was finally released in December 1937, and received a standing ovation from an audience containing that of Judy Garland. Snow White went on to do exceptionally well at the box office, and in 1939 became the top grossing sound film of all-time. Snow White at the start of the tale has been forced into the life of a scullery maid. This is being enforced by her incredibly jealous and equally vain stepmother, the Queen. This obstinately vain monarch is particularly fixated with being the fairest in the land and believes her beautiful stepdaughter, Snow White, to be a growing threat to her. However the Queens fears are eventually realised when her magic mirror declares Snow White to be the fairest in the land. Overcome with jealousy, the Queen hires a huntsman to take Snow White into the forest and kill her. The huntsman however is struck by Snow White's innocence and beauty, and tells her to flee into the forest in order to escape the Queens wrath. There she bumps into a company of dwarves, all with distinctive personalities and lovable quirks. The dwarves allow her to stay after learning she's on the run and especially after learning that she can cook and clean (I don't think sexism was a big thing in the 1930's unfortunately). Meanwhile, the Queen is hatching more maniacal schemes to find and kill Snow White. Snow White as a lead serves her purpose well enough. These days however she pales in comparison with Disney's latest and more stronger and self-sufficient movie heroines, such as: Moana and Frozen's Anna and Elsa. Since Snow White's only noticeable qualities is her uncommonly kind nature, naivety, and Betty Boop esc singing voice (which is also a little dated). She tends to come off a bit bland, but fortunately the dwarves more than make up for the leads short comings, and outright steal the show. The dwarves themselves all have different personalities, which are reflected in their names, in their timeless designs and exquisitely differing animations. The stand out has to be Dopey, his animation and musical cues made me chuckle a good few times. The dwarves serve as the charm and heart of the film, of which I am sure, has played a big part in this films continued success amongst children even today. I've heard a few people say in their reviews that they didn't think the Queen was a very effective villain. I can understand that point of view, especially since some of her schemes are not the cleverest. However when I watched the film as a kid I found the Queen to be absolutely terrifying, especially when she disguises herself as the old crone. I am pretty sure that I had nightmares over that old crone, and that for me has to show a definite level of effectiveness to a villain. The first thing for me that stands out is the terrific design. She looks menacing and intimidating as the queen, with her tall slender frame and pointed features. While her truly frightening design, as the old crone, allows the character to reveal her evil and deceitful ways. There is one character who gets cast aside and receives basically no development at all, and that would be the prince. He shows up a bit at the beginning and then again for the finale at the end. The problem with this is they have no interaction with each other in-between these events. This makes the relationship between the two characters very unbelievable by modern standards. Perhaps if he was given some more scenes to expand his personality a bit, or maybe even a name, his appearance at the end would not have been so jarring. The musical numbers for the most part are brilliant and truly timeless; such as "Heigh-Ho". This particular tune is extremely hard to get out of your head once it's ingrained itself in there. However the "I'm Wishing / One Song" and most others sung by Snow White herself have a tendency to sound a little dated, and as I mentioned before, a bit Betty Boop like. When I re-watched the film for this review, I couldn't help but be amazed by the extraordinarily lifelike animation that Disney and his incredible animation team had achieved. I hadn't watched the movie for a very long time and for some reason expected the animation to be, not bad, but dated compared to the more recent animated movies. Boy was I wrong. Eighty years on and it still looks practically flawless. There's nothing better than watching true masters of their craft and Disney's animators are in top form here. Apart from occasionally showing its age and having some key characters shockingly underdeveloped. Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs is an enduring classic that will most likely be passed down for generations to come. If you're looking to entertain your nostalgic side a bit. Or perhaps looking into the origins of modern day animation and cinema, or maybe even trying to entertain your children for a couple of hours, there is not many finer options out there than this Disney classic.

(Release Info London schedule; September 19th, 2019, Cineworld Leicester Square, London WC2H, 5–6 Leicester Square, London, WC2H 7NA, 12:20 14:30 16:40 18:50 21:00 pm) https://film.list.co.uk/listing/448346-rambo-last-blood/ "Rambo: Last Blood" Almost four decades after he drew first blood, John Rambo (Sylvester Stallone) is back as one of the greatest action heroes of all time. Now, Rambo must confront his past and unearth his ruthless combat skills to exact revenge in a final mission. A deadly journey of vengeance, "Rambo: Last Blood" marks the last chapter of the legendary series. After years of making his home in remote corners of the globe, Rambo makes the fateful decision to return to 'The U.S.', where we last saw him walking down a dusty path to a horse ranch, and past a rusted mailbox inscribed with his family name. John Rambo has finally come home. "Rambo: Last Blood" picks up the character’s epic saga, as we find Rambo settled down, and living a quiet life on his family’s sprawling ranch in Arizona. Here he’s found sanctuary and a sense of belonging, sharing his home with his adoptive family; Maria Beltran (Adriana Barraza) and her granddaughter Gabriela (Yvette Monreal). We're taking a ten-year leap forward since we last saw Rambo. He has long been removed from society but now seems to want to become a part of it. He’s been accepted into a family he loves, and wants to take care of them. Rambo has become a paternal figure to Gabriela, whose mother had long passed, and whose abusive father had abandoned her and never looked back. Alongside Maria, Rambo raised the young girl as his own. To him, she's the only thing that's pure and true in this world. Now a teenager and curious about her past, Gabriela goes in search of her biological father. She wants to judge the man for herself, and nothing Rambo or Maria can say will dissuade her. Leaving the ranch defiant and full of hope, Gabriela travels to Mexico, but the reunion with her father ends in harsh rejection. The next morning, when Gabriela doesn’t return home, a primal instinct kicks in for Rambo. He sets out to find her, vowing to Maria he will not return without her. On his recon, Rambo’s worst fears are realized when he witnesses Gabriela being drugged and abused by Victor Martinez (Óscar Jaenada) and Hugo Martinez (Sergio Peris-Mencheta), dangerous cartel members. Fueled by guilt and vengeance, Rambo prepares for all-out war. War always finds Rambo, even if he isn’t seeking it. They drew first blood. He will draw last. Rambo may have come to terms with himself and found home and family, but he’s not settled. There’s no real comfort in his life at the ranch; his body is there, but his mind isn’t. He never wants to leave the ranch. He can’t get past 'The PTSD', and everything else he cannot reign in. Rambo finds that life is it's own kind of fight and despite being home, he's still at the mercy of events beyond his control. Helping Rambo navigate the perils of being a veteran he has created a series of labyrinthian tunnels and a bunker under the ranch, where he sleeps, relaxes, and keeps his few belongings and memorabilia. It’s where Rambo feels, at least partly, like he’s still dug in, like in a trench. It’s where Rambo can release his demons. He considers the ranch above the tunnels, which houses Maria and Gabriela, representative of all that's good. The tunnels are his private hell. Rambo doesn’t do anything by half, and the tunnels and bunker had to be the ultimate man cave. It’s such an extreme idea that underneath this serene landscape and rolling hills is a maze of underground tunnel systems. The tunnels are among the lingering aftershocks from his time in combat and his more recent missions. They serve as a kind of therapy indicated for momentary lapses of war that Rambo experiences. They make sense only to him, but at the end of the film they do serve a purpose. The purpose to which Rambo alludes is that of turning his tunnels into a kind of subterranean killing field, where he retaliates against those who would bring death to his family. It’s an epic, vengeance-fueled showdown that's fast-paced, brutal, and intricate. Rambo uses his survival, stealth and weaponry skills, and his knowledge of the terrain to create these brilliantly engineered traps and weapons, lure his prey to his domain, the tunnels, and hunt them down one at a time. But here the stakes are even higher than they're for him during warfare, because they’re grounded in personal loss, grieving and revenge. Where does a warrior make his last stand? Rambo is trying to find an end for his journey. He realizes his job is protect his family; it’s the only thing he’s good at. But Rambo knows if he’s pushed, he’s going to revert back to his true self, even if that’s the last thing he wants. He knows that if what he cares most about is taken away, then he's going to bring retribution, suffering, and death to those responsible. Rambo had been so isolated for so many years, and now he’s part of a family. That dynamic helps you really understand how he thinks and what makes him tick. This film is quite different from the previous films; it’s more personal. It’s the first time we’ve seen Rambo in a family setting, and as close as he’s ever felt to home in a long time. That homelife opens up a part of Rambo that we haven’t experienced before. The film wants to depict a more human Rambo. Bringing a newfound, if temporary, sense of humanity and homelife to Rambo are Maria and Gabriela. Maria is a strong Mexican woman. She has watched John Rambo grow older and understands he carries a lot of pain, not only in his body, but in his mind. The relationship between Maria and Rambo is really beautiful. Maria’s granddaughter Gabriela is like a step-daughter to Rambo, who he raised her as his own. Gabby understands his 'PTSD' and supports him. When she decides to find her biological father, she travels to Mexico and doesn’t come back. Her disappearance alarms Rambo and he sets out to find her. Even with Gabby and Maria’s support, and a successful business and a stable homelife, Rambo remains, at heart, a wounded warrior, a living example of the old saying, you can’t go home again. The character was introduced to moviegoers in "First Blood", based on a novel by David Morrell, as an elite 'Special Forces' veteran and war hero skilled in weaponry, hand-to-hand combat, survival tactics, and guerilla warfare, none of which could prepare him for his return to civilian life. With the help of his former commanding officer, Rambo finds new purpose for his formidable and deadly talents, taking him back to Vietnam to rescue some of his imprisoned brothers-in-arms, in "Rambo: First Blood, Part II"; to Afghanistan, to come to the aid of his only friend, in "Rambo III"; and to Myanmar, where he unleashes his fury to help some captured missionaries and villagers. Since it's debut nearly four decades ago, 'The Rambo Series' has become one of the most iconic action-movie franchises of all time. An ex-'Green Beret' haunted by memories of Vietnam, the legendary fighting machine known as Rambo has freed 'POWs', rescued his commanding officer from 'The Soviets', and liberated missionaries in Myanmar. "Rambo: Last Blood" marks the last chapter of the legendary series, as Rambo must confront his past and unearth his ruthless combat skills for one final mission. Now, Rambo must confront his past and unearth his ruthless combat skills to exact revenge in a climactic and truly personal mission. A thrilling, intense and gritty journey, the film presents audiences with the opportunity to see this iconic character and reluctant hero on the big screen for one final war. We see Rambo prepping each deadly trap, which you can trace back to when you see the kills; you've anticipated and envisioned what Rambo is going to do with each trap. You don’t see Rambo with two rocket launchers in each hand, blowing helicopters out of the sky, like he’s done in some of the previous films. This is the Rambo we met in "First Blood", who uses his skills and environment to hunt and trap his prey. There's still plenty of action, gunplay, and vengeance, but it’s all more grounded in reality. This is a Rambo that's going back to his roots. This film closes a circle for the character and series. The film honors Rambo and all the films by creating a slightly different kind of action movie and story that combines everything audiences love about the character, while putting him in a new environment, and against an enemy unlike any he’s battled. The artist who embodies this legendary figure promises that this closing chapter of an over-30 year cinematic ride will give audiences a jolt unlike any they’ve experienced with the franchise before. It's an exciting and breathless experience for the audience. They go by quickly because they’ve already been set up. At the same time, the story builds and builds to a finale that's seismic, volcanic and very satisfying.

After a hard day of work, a businessman, Dean, decides to take a detour from family life to go to his usual kebab shop. There, he encounters a seductive and witty young prostitue, Megan, and the two have immediate chemistry. However, in the dead of night, appearances are never quite what they seem and sometimes blurred intentions trump the mind... What starts as a lovely night of good circumstances might just turn out to be something quite different.

(London Film Festival, October 8th, 2019, BFI Southbank, Belvedere Rd, Lambeth, London SE1 8XT, United Kingdom, 18:10 pm) https://whatson.bfi.org.uk/lff/Online/default.asp?BOparam::WScontent::loadArticle::permalink=guestofhonour&BOparam::WScontent::loadArticle::context_id= "Guest Of Honour" Jim Davis (David Thewlis) and his daughter Veronica (Laysla De Oliveira), a young high-school music teacher, attempt to unravel their complicated histories and intertwined secrets in "Guest Of Honour", a film that weaves through time exploring perception and penance, memory and forgiveness. A hoax instigated by an aggressive school bus driver Mike (Rossif Sutherland) goes very wrong. Accused of abusing her position of authority with 17-year-old Clive (Alexandre Bourgeois) and another student, Veronica is imprisoned. Convinced that she deserves to be punished for crimes she committed at an earlier age, Veronica rebuffs her father’s attempts to secure her early release. Confused and frustrated by Veronica’s intransigence, Jim’s anguish begins to impinge on his job. As a food inspector, he wields great power over small, family-owned restaurants. It’s a power he doesn’t hesitate to use. While preparing Jim’s funeral, Veronica confides the secrets of her past to Father Greg (Luke Wilson) who may hold the final piece of this father-daughter puzzle. "Guest Of Honour" is a twisting morality tale exploring the complicated relationship between Jim, and his daughter Veronica, a young high-school music teacher, and the past that haunts them both. As the film weaves through time, scenes from the past catch up to the present, illuminating dark secrets. Jim is a food inspector working in a multicultural city. For him, each establishment is a potential hazard. He has the power to shut down restaurants not observing health codes. It’s a power he doesn’t hesitate to wield. Part of Jim’s weekly ritual is visiting his daughter in prison. Having confessed to abusing her position of authority as a music teacher during a high school band trip, Veronica rebuffs her father’s attempts to secure an early release. Confused and frustrated by his daughter’s intransigence, Jim’s anguish begins to impinge on his work. Scenes from the band trip gradually reveal that Veronica and Clive, one of her senior students, turned the tables on Mike, their aggressive bus driver. Their prank spirals out of control and becomes the basis for the charges brought against Veronica. Over Jim’s visits with Veronica, it becomes clear that there's another history at play. Veronica is using the prison sentence to punish herself for earlier transgressions. When she was a young girl, Veronica believed that her father was having an affair with her music teacher. Tragedy unfolds, in which Veronica is implicated, but was never held responsible. As a teenager, she confessed to the teacher’s son, with devastating consequences. Having lived with these secrets for years, Veronica has found a unique way of serving her penance. Jim doesn’t seem at all aware of his daughter’s true history even though he finds himself increasingly implicated in the compelling revelations of Veronica’s personal narrative. Father and daughter move towards a resolution, which is brought to a brutal halt when Jim dies. As she prepares for Jim’s funeral, Veronica confides in Father Greg (Luke Wilson) who may hold the final piece to the puzzle of the past. "Guest Of Honour" is a disturbing and compelling study of perception, memory and forgiveness. As a food inspector, Jim has the power to close a restaurant down, and while he uses this authority to determine other people’s destinies, he desperately tries to understand his own place in the world. Jim’s relationship with his daughter is obviously highly complex, that’s what the film is about. Realizing that the story really begins there, with the death of the mother. Jim is left on his own from then onwards, the fifteen intervening years between Veronica as young girl and Veronica as a woman. We've to understand what Jim so much loved about Veronica as a woman, a woman who’s gone off the rails, a woman who now baffles him, a woman who seems absolutely so incomprehensible in terms of her motives. And seeing that little girl playing the piano, the whole story becomes clear. Of course, there are sub-plots and various metaphorical issues and symbolism and storytelling, but it’s about a man trying to communicate with his daughter, trying to communicate the love he has for his daughter. That's utterly relatable in terms of how so many young people can get lost somewhere between adolescence and early adulthood, in all kinds of things that maybe one wouldn’t anticipate in their earlier years and can be catastrophic. It’s a terrible thing that’s happened really. One of the Jim’s characteristics is this sense of power he wields as a food inspector which may sound a rather banal job description. It doesn’t evoke wonderful images of this is a fascinating character we want to get to know until you really go down that hole and see what the issues are with food inspectors, and what a power-complex this man has. Simply, he can wreak havoc on people’s lives, close down family businesses with the flick of a pen-based on opinion or perfidy. He starts to abuse his power and manipulate his occupation to his own ends. But he’s rather delusional. He sees himself as some saviour, as some campaigner for health and safety, health and cleanliness, the health code is his bible and it takes him over. We've a backstory where he started a restaurant and that seems to have been scuppered by what happened to Veronica. He has to walk away from that business because of the vicissitudes of Veronica’s life and whether he holds some resentment there's another thing to be discussed. Maybe he’s doing this job as some kind of revenge. Now he enters a restaurant with the power to destroy the business, the lives of the owners. His vocation is taken away from him, and now he can visit the same fate on others. There are many levels to this film, you keep discovering. His daughter Veronica is a young music teacher who's passionate about her craft. But, she also carries trauma that bleeds into her relationship with her father. The film explores the complexities of family life. How family can absolutely make you or absolutely break you or both at the same time. The vast breadth of feelings, the turmoil those feelings cause! Music is very important to Veronica, it’s her source of joy and we’ll see in "Guest Of Honour" that she’s not always happy all the time so it will be nice to see the moments where she's lost in her music. She believes that she has found a way to a strange sort of peace in her life, until that is challenged by revelations of a past she never fully understood. She’s a character who’s broken, who makes impulsive, self-destructive decisions. We see her joy in music and we see her dark pain as well. With incarceration, she’s found a way of medicating herself. But it’s not sustainable and then something unexpected happens, which transforms her life. The character who holds the key to this past seems to be a priest. Father Greg is a Texan who's transplanted to Canada, The biggest mystery in the film is whether the food inspector Jim, in asking for his eulogy to be performed by this particular priest, has somehow planned an emotional reconciliation he could never have achieved with his daughter in life. Father Greg is an unusual priest. He knows about Veronica who’s come to see him to arrange a funeral for Jim. As he talks with Veronica to learn details for the eulogy, Father Greg comes to understand that he knows a great deal about her narrative. But he’s bound by oath not to share his knowledge. He breaks his word because, he decides, it's critical for Veronica to understand her father. Rather than see her continue to suffer, living with false assumptions, Father Greg renounces his pledge. As viewers, we can locate ourselves in this very complex narrative in terms of how he sets himself within it. Father Greg has an unexpected front row seat to Veronica’s story. Father Greg is one of those characters that’s woven throughout the story, Not quite a narrator, and not the protagonist, but a figure that intersects with the different characters. In that way, he knows all of the people that the audience meets, at different times and in different situations. And often times, as we find out, he knows these very personal parts of some of the characters’ histories. Father Greg’s character is a way for the audience to keep up with the storyline and these characters whose lives interrelate. You've these imperfect, interwoven characters and then there’s the priest who’s something of a psychiatrist, or a psychologist, or a doctor, somebody that people go to and share their personal stories. “Guest Of Honour" is an emotional investigation of the bond between a father and a daughter. Their history has been rocked by events that neither fully understands. They’re both in a suspended state for much of the film, trying to understand the nature of their connection to one another. There’s a very clear sense of time passing in this film. While we understand from the beginning that their physical relationship has ended with the father’s death, the details of their past are evealed in a form of psychological autopsy. The film finds a cinematic way of allowing the viewer to inhabit they particular world the characters are trying to navigate. The film explores what might be called the emotional chronology of Jim and his daughter, Veronica, a way of measuring their complex feelings. While the structure of the film is non-linear, it's actually based on a simple recounting of the scenes as they flow into the characters’ minds. While the situations specific to Jim and Veronica are extreme, the parent/child bond will be very familiar to audiences. The film creates a sense that for Jim and Veronica the scenes all play in a continuous and sometimes shocking sense of the ‘eternal present’. The film itself becomes a sort of machine through which the characters come to an understanding of what they mean to each other. "Guest Of Honour" is a story told through glass. Apart from the actual glass of the camera lens, which displays the way in which images of the past can be refracted and refigured, there's a literal use of a glass musical instrument woven through the film. The use of glass as a distorting lens, as well as a material which allows the process of creative expression, is an important motif in "Guest Of Honour". The soundtrack wows in unexpected ways, as the characters come to terms with the complexity of their lives and the exoticism of their relationship to their own pasts. Every child feels their parents made mistakes, certain ways in which the parent did not express love, or pay the right sort of attention. Those moments reverberate through our lives in sometimes painful ways. "Guest Of Honour" covers such a wide range of time, you get to see the evolution of specific characters, which is very exciting. Our family has been around us for our entire lives, they’re everything we know. Sometimes we project our feelings onto them, sometimes we feel their words are hurtful, but that’s what having a family is all about. The film ends with an unexpected reconciliation.

(London Filn Festival, Thursday October 10th 2019, Odeon Tottenham Court Road, Central Cross, 30 Tottenham Court Rd, London W1T 1BX, UK, 18:15 pm) https://whatson.bfi.org.uk/lff/Online/default.asp?BOparam::WScontent::loadArticle::permalink=cunningham&BOparam::WScontent::loadArticle::context_id= "Cunningham" "Cunningham" traces Merce’s artistic evolution over three decades of risk and discovery (1944–1972), from his early years as a struggling dancer in postwar New York to his emergence as one of the world’s most visionary choreographers. The '3D' technology weaves together Merce's philosophies and stories, creating a visceral journey into his innovative work. A breathtaking explosion of dance, music, and never-before-seen archival material, the film is a timely tribute to one of the world’s greatest modern dance artists. During the years 1942-1972, he made his dances against all odds. He was always ready to place himself in unfamiliar situations and find new solutions. Throughout his career he embraced new technologies, from 16mm, television and video to the use of computers, body sensors and motion-capture technology. Cunningham had arrived in the city in 1939 with an invitation to join Graham’s company. In the 1940s, Merce Cunningham, along with John Cage, began a journey that would change the relationship between contemporary dance, music and art. Cunningham proposed the revolutionary idea that dance could exist independent of music, a concept that would dominate his unparalleled career for more than half a century. He popularized the idea of dance as a visual experience and trained some of the greatest dancers of his time, including Paul Taylor, Viola Farber, Douglas Dunn, Charles Moulton, Deborah Hay, Steve Paxton, Ashley Chen and Jonah Bokaer. 'The United States', and New York in particular, was becoming the global center of artistic innovation. 'Abstract Expressionist' painters like Willem de Kooning and Jackson Pollock, radical composers including Arnold Schoenberg, and Martha Graham’s revolutionary troupe dominated the cultural scene. In 1944, he presented his first solo concert with composer John Cage, who became his frequent collaborator and lifelong romantic partner. Together they explored groundbreaking artistic philosophies, incorporating experiments with chance into their work as a way to free themselves from preconceived ideas. The pair acquired a third creative partner in 1952 when they met the then- emerging artist Robert Rauschenberg at the experimental, arts-focused 'Black Mountain College' in North Carolina. Like Cunningham and Cage, Rauschenberg resisted labels during his lengthy career, but is widely acknowledged as a forerunner in many art movements that developed after 'Abstract Expressionism'. Without a steady source of income, they collected scrap wood off the street and burned it to keep warm in winter. Cunningham rehearsed in his living space and often alone. In 1953, Cunningham launched 'The Merce Cunningham Dance Company' so he could concentrate full-time on his explorations. "Cunningham" includes a treasure trove of archival materials, a visual record of the dancer’s singular talent, Merce alone and with his company, rehearsing, performing, choreographing, and teaching. Often dressed in rehearsal clothes, he and his dancers bend, leap, spin and fall with abandon, combining what he thought were the best elements of classical ballet with the most interesting innovations in modern dance. One of the most memorable is a Rauschenberg-designed pointillist backdrop used for the original presentation of 'Summerspace', a 1958 collaboration. In the 1960s, Andy Warhol, the major figure of New York avant-garde film world, spent quite a bit of time in Merce’s studio. By the early 1970s, Merce began working with film and video himself primarily with filmmaker Charles Atlas. When Carolyn Brown, the last original member of his first company, left in 1972, that, the end of an era. Dance pioneer Merce Cunningham created some of the most iconic, influential work of his generation, incorporating the groundbreaking artistic ideals of mid-century visual arts and music, and redefining his art form. During a lifetime of artistic engagement with such diverse musicians as John Cage, Robert Rauschenberg, and Andy Warhol, Cunningham created a new dance technique and celebrated movement as manifestation of being human and of being alive. After his death in 2009 at the age of 90, many felt uncertain about the future of his legacy and his fearless innovations. The new documentary "Cunningham" guarantees that his work will live on, in a stunning immersive experience that preserves some of his greatest works. Neither a straightforward biopic nor a traditional concert film, "Cunningham" was conceived as a 93-minute art piece that would tell the master’s story through his work. Combining Cunningham’s fascinating life experiences with his landmark artistic achievements, the film forges a delicate balance between facts and metaphors, exposition and poetry. A tribute to the visionary artist’s creative genius in a journey through the first 30 years of his career in New York City, the film traces the evolution of his thought and channels his spirit. Personal photographs, intimate letters, 16mm and 35mm footage, and home movies of performances, rehearsals, tours and gatherings offer the audience a glimpse of the choreographer’s visionary mind, while excerpts of iconic Cunningham works are performed by the last generation of his dancers and reimagined for '3-D' cinema. A '3D' movie about an avant-garde choreographer? We can make documentaries about choreographers or dancers as people, about life of a dance company and so on. But how to make a film that will allow the audience to experience choreographers work? "Cunningham" is based on an iconic photo of Merce’s dancers posing in the Robert Rauschenberg’s pointillist décor of his piece 'Summerspace', which was taken by Robert Rutledge in 1958. Merce staged this photograph himself by dropping Rauschenberg’s canvas on both the wall and the floor so it surrounded the dancers. It becomes that even back in the 1950s, before Merce developed the idea of an event, he had been longing to create immersive environments for his dances. The film is drawn to the genius of Merce Cunningham, the intricacies of his mind; his approaches that he invented making his dances; and his philosophies that he followed living his life and re-defining ideas about being human. His story is an incredible triumph of the human spirit. During the first 30 years of his career, between 1942-1972, he persevered, with great determination and stamina, to make dances against all odds. He was always ready to get outside himself, to place himself in unknown situations, and find new solutions. All this took place in a unique artistic climate, during the 1950s and 1960s in New York, when Cunningham and his collaborators were united by their poverty and ideas and art and life had virtually no separation. Merce’s dances evoke a sense of timelessness, a space in between rational and irrational, intellectual and emotional, immediate and eternal, that truly renews us. '3D' offers interesting opportunities as it articulates the relationship between the dancers in and to the space, awaking a kinesthetic response among the viewers. It also favors uncut choreographed shots, moving camera, and multiple layers of action in relation to the setting, everything that allows working with Merce’s choreography on screen in new ways. Merce and '3D' represent an idea fit, not only because of his use of space but also because of his interest in every technological advancement of his time, from 16mm film to motion capture, and his willingness to adapt and work in unconventional settings/locations, creating over 700 Cunningham Events, I.e. performances comprised of excerpts from different dances adapted for a specific location with the audience following the dancers. Today, '3D' allows for his dream to come true. The film is a 90-minute artwork in itself, which tells Merce’s story through his dances. It's a hybrid, rooted in both imaginary worlds and moving life experiences. A delicate balance between facts and metaphors, exposition and poetry. A single camera approach is used to choreograph the viewer’s eye, highlighting the dimensional relationships among performers and settings, uniquely enabled by '3D' technology. The aspiration has been to develop a unique language, integrating all the elements of the film in a subtle, distinct and poetic way, in Merce’s spirit. Seeing a dance through the lens of a camera changes everything. While viewing a dance on a stage you are free to look anywhere in the space, whereas the camera has to be carefully and strategically placed as it guides the eye within the limits of its perspective. The lens often skews a shape. For instance, it can make an arm look lifted when it should simply be horizontal or it can distort the spacing dramatically. With the true artistic collaboration that we developed, these small details could be worked out seamlessly and we developed a true understanding for one another’s point of view. Film is forever, so there's an enormous amount of pressure for the performers and an enormous responsibility in making the final choices on the takes. But beyond that trigger of emotion is the fact that he and his early collaborators and dancers tell the story, in their own voices, which gives a weight and power to this film that's undeniable. His willingness to break boundaries has been infectious and engendered courage in all of us. You've to love dancing to stick to it. It gives you nothing back, no manuscripts to store away, no paintings to show on walls and maybe hang in museums, no poems to be printed and sold, nothing but that single fleeting moment when you feel alive.