Search Results

"The Royal Hotel"     Americans Hanna (Julia Garner), and Liv (Jessica Henwick), are best friends backpacking in Australia. After they run out of money, Liv, looking for an adventure, convinces Hanna to take a temporary live-in job behind the bar of a pub called ’The Royal Hotel’ in a remote Outback mining town. Bar owner Billy and a host of locals give the girls a riotous introduction to Down Under drinking culture but soon Hanna and Liv find themselves trapped in an unnerving situation that grows rapidly out of their control.   The film is inspired by the feature documentary 'Hotel Coolgardie'. It's the story of two young Scandinavian women trapped in an Australian mining town. This clash of cultures feels like a way into a broader discussion about drinking culture and gender dynamics. There’s a part of us that understands that pub world and a part of us that's terrified by it. "The Royal Hotel" feels like an opportunity to do that by putting the two lead characters into a remote community, exploring how these two women navigate an unfamiliar and antagonistic environment, far removed from the urban existence they're used to. "The Royal Hotel" explores Hanna and Liv's experiences within the intense and volatile setting they find themselves in, while also delving into the underlying factors that contribute to its hostility. Hanna doesn't want to be there in the first place and she's feeling vulnerable most of the time, while Liv is more inclined to say ‘lighten up, it's not that bad…it’s just the culture'. With these two characters the film shows the subtleties in the way that women respond in these kinds of circumstances. The film wants to tell this outback story, through a female gaze, to turn the tables on a genre that's traditionally been very male, and to use the masculinity of that world as the fuel for the story, and to be able to examine some of the complications around male culture, but it feels reductive.   The central dramatic question of this film is not will they get out? It’s ‘should they?’ It's a much more subtle question, because it goes to the heart of this very masculine culture and what's unacceptable within that culture. It's a film that builds slowly and inexorably to the question of should they leave. It's about the way people respond to trauma. There's one way where you can be very on high alert, very fearful, or the other way, where you just dive in and drink it all away. The ending is a provocation. It generates conversation around what's acceptable within our culture and when we should stand up for ourselves and take a stand. And it’s a situation that's all too common for young women going into environments where they've little power; where they can start doubting whether their version of reality is the real version and start being co-opted into a culture that is making them feel like they're the ones who are crazy.   "The Royal Hotel" is set in a mining town and not a farming community so we were quite specific about what the landscape should look like. Mining towns are set up to support industry and are mostly filled with fly-in fly-out workers from interstate. The film wants the set to feel normal and inviting in the way that pubs quite often do, but it feels cold or menacing. This place is a threat. While the film has nods to thriller and Western genres, it cannot be readily characterised as a genre piece. Certainly, it's like a nightmare and at times we're almost verging towards horror, but you can not describe this as a genre film. The trick of it and the balancing act within it's that you're observing real behaviours, but you're coming at it from a particular perspective and by ramping up certain key moments you're heightening tensions within it.   Written by Gregory Mann

(Release Info UK schedule; January 17th, 2020, Glasgow Film Theatre, 12 Rose Street, Glasgow, G3 6RB, 13:30 19:30) https://film.list.co.uk/listing/1447804-a-hidden-life "A Hidden Life" Based on real events, "A Hidden Life" is the story of an unsung hero, Franz Jägerstätter (August Diehl), who refused to fight for 'The Nazis' in 'World War II'. When the Austrian peasant farmer is faced with the threat of execution for treason, it's his unwavering faith and his love for his wife Franziska (Valerie Pachner) and children that keep his spirit alive. "A Hidden Life" is based on the true story of Franz Jägerstätter, an Austrian peasant farmer, who refused to take the oath of allegiance to Hitler during 'World War II', sacrificing everything, including his life, rather than to fight for 'The Nazis'. Born and raised in the village of 'St. Radegund', Jägerstätter is farming his land when war breaks out. Married to Franziska, the couple are very much in love and involved with the tight-knit community. They live a simple life in the fertile valleys and mountains of upper Austria, with the passing years marked by the arrival of the couple’s three girls Maria (Sarah Born), Rosalia (Karin Neuhäuser) and Aloisa (Franziska Lang). When Franz is called up to basic training, a requirement for all Austrian men, he's away from his beloved wife and children for months. Eventually, when France surrenders and it seems the war might end soon, he's sent back home. His mother and sister-in-law Resie (Maria Simon) come to live with them, and for a while things seem to go on as normal. Instead of retreating, the war escalates, and Franz and the other men in the village are called up to fight. The first requirement of a new soldier is to swear an oath of allegiance to Adolf Hitler and 'The German State'. Despite pleas from his neighbors, fellow soldiers and commanding officers, Franz refuses the oath; objecting to Hitler and 'The Nazi Regime'. With his quiet act of resistance he asks the question, if leaders are evil, what does one do? With a sense of personal responsibility and the inability to do what he believes is wrong. Meanwhile Franziska is left to deal with the aftermath of his decision. Not only is she now the caretaker of the family’s farm as well as her three young daughters, she's iostracized from her community. Fear of Hitler forces once kindly neighbors to turn their backs on 'The Jägerstätter Family'. Wrestling with the knowledge that his decision would mean arrest and likely death, Franz finds strength in Franziska's love and support. He's imprisoned, first in Enns, then in Berlin; and waits months for trial. During his time in prison, he and Franziska write letters to one another and give each other strength. After months of incarceration, the case goes to trial. Franz is found guilty and sentenced to death. While Franz’s faith drives him to resist taking the oath to Hitler, representatives from religious, civic, government and military institutions plead with him to disavow his beliefs and swear his allegiance, even if he's disingenuous, in order to save his life. Franz continues to stand up for his beliefs and is executed by 'The German State' in August 1943. His wife and three daughters survive. The relationship between Franz and his wife Franziska endures. The film portrays their bond as deeply as Franz’s devotion to his cause. At every turn Franziska is there for Franz; strong, unfaltering and supportive of his path while raising their daughters and running the farm alone, eventually with help from her mother-in-law and sister. Franz Jägerstätter is born on May 20th, 1907, in the Austrian village of 'St. Radegund'. His mother is an unmarried farm servant, Rosalia Huber (Jasmin Mairhofer). His father died in 'The First World War'. Franz’s formal education is slight and brief. From 1913 to 1921 he attends the one-room school in 'St. Radegund', where a single teacher taught seven grades. At a given time, there are about fifty to sixty children in all. But one sees from his writing that he's a quick learner with a well-organized and independent mind. Franz’s birthplace is as inauspicious as his education. The village of 'St. Radegund', on the 'River Salzach , is on the northwestern edge of Austria. The village, with a population of about five hundred, appears only on the most detailed maps of Austria. Mozart’s 'Salzburg" is to the south, 'Linz' to the east, 'Vienna' much further east. The closest major German city is 'Munich'. Hitler’s birthplace, the Austrian town of 'Braunau', isn’t far from 'St. Radegund'. Franz grows up mainly among farmers. 'The Jägerstätter' farm is one among many in the area. It's a region in which 'Catholicism' is deeply embedded. The idea of not being 'Catholic' is, for nearly everyone Franz knows, as unthinkable as moving to another planet, though he has a cousin who becomes a 'Jehovah’s Witness'. One reads in the accounts of saints lives how pious some of them are from the cradle to the grave. The stories local people tell of Franz as a young man go in the opposite direction. In his teens he isn't hesitant to get involved in fistfights. He enjoys all the pastimes that his friends enjoyed. Along with all his neighbors, he goes to church when everyone else did, but no one would have remarked on his being a saint in the making. In 1930, at age twenty-three, Franz works for a time in the Austrian mining town of 'Eisenerz'. Returning to 'St. Radegund', Franz surprises his family and neighbors by arriving on a motorcycle he has purchased with money he earned in the city. No one else in the area has a motorcycle. The most important single factor attributed to bring about a change in Franz is his marriage to Franziska Schwaninger. Nearly everyone who lives in the area saw this as the main border-crossing event of his adult life. Franz is a different man afterward. Franziska is six years younger than Franz. She's very strong having been brought up in that area. She comes from a deeply religious family; her father and grandmother are both members of 'The Marian Congregation'. Her grandmother belonged to 'The Third Order Of St. Francis'. Before Franziska’s marriage, she has considered becoming a nun. After a short engagement, the two marries on April 9th, 1936. Franz is almost twenty-nine, Franziska twenty-three. It's a happy marriage. In one of his letters to Franziska during his period of army training in 1940, he mentions how fortunate and harmonious have been their years of marriage. Years after her father’s death, 'The Jägerstätter’s' eldest daughter, wondering aloud whether she would ever marry, recalls her mother warning her that married couples often fight. They've three children, all daughters; Rosalia in 1937, Maria in 1938, and Aloisia in 1940. There's not a marriage out of touch with the world beyond their farm. Franz and Franziska are attentive to what's going on just across the river from 'St. Radegund' in Germany. On March 12th, 1938, 'The Eighth Army' of 'The German State' crosses 'The German-Austrian' border. Assisted by 'The Local Nazi' movement and supported by the vast majority of the Austrian population, German troops quickly take control of Austria then organized a national plebiscite on April 10th to confirm the union with Germany. With few daring to vote against what have already been imposed by military methods, 'The Annexation' of Austria by Germany was even ratified by popular ballot. Austria, now an integral part of 'Nazi-Germany', ceased to exist as an independent state. Well before 'The Annexation', Franz has been an 'Anti-Nazi', but the event that brought his aversion to a much deeper level is a remarkable dream he has in January 1938. Perhaps it's triggered by a newspaper article he has read a few days earlier reporting that 150,000 more young people have been accepted into 'The Hitler Youth Movement'. In his dream he sees a wonderful train coming around a mountain. This train is going to hell. The train, he realizes, symbolized the glittering 'Nazi Regime' with all it's spectacles and it's associated organizations, 'Hitler Youth' being one of the most important and spiritual corrupting. In 'St. Radegund' it's widely known that Franz, ignoring the advice of his neighbors, has voted against 'The Annexation', but, in the reporting of the new regime in Vienna, Franz’s solitary vote was left unrecorded. It's seen as endangering the village to put on record that even one person has dared raise a discordant voice. After all, as Franz is painfully aware, even Austria’s 'Catholic' hierarchy had advocated a yes vote. Afterward 'Cardinal' Innitzer (Thomas Prenn), principal hierarch of 'The Catholic Church' in Austria, signed a declaration endorsing 'The Annexation'. Having become citizens of Germany, every able Austrian is subject to conscription. Franz is called up in June 1940, taking his military vow in 'Braunau', Hitler’s birthplace, but a few days later he returns to his farm, as farmers are needed no less than soldiers. Franz realizes that a return to the army is not possible for him. Even at the cost of his life, he would have to say no. Franz readily talked about his views with anyone who would listen. Most often he's told that his main responsibility is to his family and that it would be better to risk death in the army on their behalf than to take steps that would almost certainly guarantee his death. While he would certainly do what he could to preserve his life for the sake of his family, Franz notes that self-preservation did not make it permissible to go and murder other people’s families. He points out that to accept military service also means leaving his family without any assurance he would return alive. Franz even managed to meet with the bishop of Linz, Joseph Fliesser (Michael Nyqvist). Franziska is in the adjacent waiting room. When Franz comes out of the bishop’s consulting room, Franziska recalls that he's very sad. They don’t dare commit themselves or it will be their turn next. Having gone through his training, nearly two years went by without Franz’s receiving a summons to return to the army. Throughout that period, each time mail is delivered to 'The Jägerstätter' farm, both husband and wife are in dread. Finally on February 23rd, 1943, the fateful letter arrived. Franz is ordered to report to a military base in 'Enns', near 'Linz', two days later. At the station in 'Tittmoning', Franz and Franziska could not let go of each other until the train’s movement forced them out to separate. Franz is already two days late for his appointment at 'Enns'. The following day Franz is placed under arrest and transported to the military remand prison in nearby Linz. No one knows better than Franziska how carefully thought out is the position Franz is taking. Even so, it's impossible for her not to encourage him occasionally to search for some alternate path that might not violate his conscience but perhaps would save his life. In the army base at 'Enns' people traps him by means of trick questions and so as to make him once again into a soldier. It's not easy to keep his conviction. It may become even more difficult. Without warning, on May 4th, 1943, Franz is taken by train to the prison at 'Tegel', a suburb of 'Berlin'. Here Franz would spend the last three months of his life in solitary confinement. On July 6th, 1943, a brief trial occurred. Franz is convicted of 'undermining military morale' by inciting the refusal to perform the required service in 'The German Army'. Franz is sentenced to death. On July 9th, 1943, Franz and Franziska have a last meeting. On July 14th, 1943, Franz’s death sentence is confirmed by 'The German State War Court'. During his time in 'Berlin', Franz was permitted to write only one letter to Franziska each month, plus a fourth that was written on the day of his execution. The four letters bear witness to his extraordinary calm, conviction, and even happiness. On August 9th, 1943, Franz is taken to Brandenburg where, at about 4:00 p.m., he's killed by guillotine. He dies with no expectation that his sacrifice would make any difference to anyone. He knows that, for his neighbors, the refusal of army service is incomprehensible, an act of folly, a sin against his family, his community, and even his church, which has called on no one to refuse military service. Franz knows that, beyond his family and community, his death would go entirely unnoticed and have no impact on 'The Nazi' movement or hasten the end of the war. He would soon be forgotten. Who would remember or care about 'The Anti-Nazi Gesture' of an uneducated farmer? He would be just one more filed-away name among many thousands who were tried and executed with bureaucratic indifference during 'The Nazi Era'. The film is set in 'St. Radegund' where the events depicted actually took place, including certain interiors of 'The Jägerstätter' house, which has over the years become a pilgrimage site, as well as by 'The Salzach' river near 'St. Radegund' and in the woods below the house. 'St. Radegund' is a small village of 500 people in 'Upper Austria', near Salzburg and 'The German Border', in the same province where Hitler was born and spent his early youth, not far from Berchtesgaden, his mountain retreat during his years as head of 'The German State'. The clock visible on the wall of 'The Jägerstätter' living room is the one that Franziska is listening to when, at four in the afternoon on August 9th, 1943, at the very hour of Franz’s execution, she remembered feeling her husband’s presence. The bedroom is theirs and looks as it did then. Her embroidery still hangs on the walls. Franz and Franziska’s three daughters, Maria, Rosalia and Aloisa live in, or near, 'St. Radegund'. The story plays in churches and cathedrals, farms with real livestock, orchards, up mountains, in fields and along rural pathways. Nature and the natural environment are part of the subtext and the locations provided us with a foundation to build up from. In addition to his work as a farmer, Franz Jägerstätter serves as a sexton at the local church. He cleanes, rang the bell, and prepared weddings and funerals; without compensation and in addition to his duties as a farmer. The family’s various pursuits required a wardrobe that reflects not just their interests but their economic status. There's always imagination with costumes. But in this case, the most important part is getting as close to the reality as possible. The historic background of the story requires modern buildings and signs of contemporary life. The film draws on actual letters exchanged between Franz and Franziska while Jägerstätter was in prison. The collection was edited by Erna Putz and published in English by 'Orbis Books'. Some lines have been added to the letters, and sometimes the letters are paraphrased. The story was little known outside of 'St. Radegund', and might never have been discovered, were it not for the research of Gordon Zahn, an American who visited the village in the 1970s. Franziska passed away in 2013, aged 100. Today, the fields around 'St. Radegund' are covered in corn, a crop that's not grown at the time, as well as with power lines and modern houses, some immediately adjacent to 'The Jägerstätter’s' own. "A Hidden Life" primarily uses natural light, turning to artificial illumination only on rare occasions. Changing lighting conditions requires a continuous attention for stop changes to ensure proper exposure. For all the other sets, including the prison cells, the film works with the sun, adjusting the schedule to the appropriate time of day. The film is shot digitally on 'The Red Epic Dragon' camera system. The camera is selected for it's ability to handle stark contrast within a scene, preserving details in both the highlights and shadows of the image, while still maintaining realistic color. The film focuses on the emotional journeys and crises of conscience of the characters, the music reflects their story. The solo violin throughout the film embodies the connection between the two main characters. It’s an extraordinary, enduring love story that investigates human reactions and motivations and just how far people will push for their beliefs and conscience. It asks hard questions; do you've the right to hurt people that you love in service of the greater good? Ultimately, it's a timeless story of devotion, love and forgiveness. People relied on each other, and at that time that also means that you could not break out and be different. You've to toe the line. For the growing good of the world is partly dependent on unhistoric acts; and that things are not so ill with you and me as they might have been is half owing to the number who lived faithfully a hidden life, and rest in the unvisited tombs.

Get out of the way kids, get to the back of the line, this is my time! I’ve waited 14 years, 14 long years. The anticipation, the excitement, the hope, the suspense. It was all there. All 22 of my years had these emotions. The 8 year old boy inside me who saw the first one was on the edge of his seat. Was it all worth it? Ehhhhh. I’ll be honest, the first Incredibles was brilliant, it wasn’t one of my favourite Pixar films, but it was real good. An animated film about superheroes at an age when I was so into Spiderman, this was my film, and as a kid I loved it. The more Pixar films I’ve seen since, the further down it’s gone on my list off favourite Pixar films. So I was excited to see it, but not over the top that will make this an impartial review. 📷Originally posted by imdcathsmeow This film continues straight from the first one, The Underminer destroys the city despite The Incredibles and Frozones best intentions to save it. The Government aren’t happy that they get involved and don’t revoke the law that prevents superheroes from being in the public eye. Frozone makes a contact with a super rich guy and his sister who wants to change that. Elastigirl becomes the poster girl for this and leaves Mr Incredible to be a house husband which he struggles with. The Screenslaver is the villain who turns and controls people using tv screens. Long story short, The Incredibles saves the day. I don’t want to ruin too much.  This instalment is top stuff, it’s action scenes flow beautifully, the comedy pours out at every necessary moment. Jack-Jack completely steals the show, the scene where he is fighting the raccoon is brilliant. I laughed in the cinema, that’s very rare for me. There is enough there for me, as a sort of adult and fan of the previous film to be happy about, but also new fresh stuff that would make a new fan equally content with.  📷Originally posted by thekidd-n-side However I do have some criticisms with the due, nothing technically because it is wonderfully made, the colours, the sets, the pacing, the mise-en-scene is crafted superbly. It’s beautiful to look at, but that is the mark that Pixar films have set recently. As an audience we shouldn’t expect less than perfect from Pixar. The criticisms I have is that the film has too many messages that aren’t really explored. Normally Pixar films deal with a key issue that is explored but it is normally resolved. Bug’s Life - Class. Wall-E - Environmental issues. Inside Out - Mental Health. With Incredibles 2 however, gender issues, justice system and technology advancements are explored and act as issues that are explored within the film but they really come to nothing.  Mr Incredible struggles with not feeling like a man because he is doing a role as the parent that historically been a womens job. He is the not the bread-winner, he doesn’t feel like a man because he doesn’t have a job. Gags are made throughout the film about this and in the end we really don’t see an acceptance of him being happy that his wife, love of his life is in the spotlight and getting the credit that she wouldn’t get as a mother. I shan’t go into details further about this, nor the other things I noticed because I realise that this is predominantly a kids film. Pixar do normally set a standard when it comes to important issues in their films, whilst their films are entertainment sometimes they can be a key lesson. I just feel that the messages they were putting across were too many, and not integrated into the film like they usually were.  4/5  A Pixar film that doesn’t flop, what a lovely surprise. A brilliant addition to the collection. It doesn’t have the emotional impact that has set Pixar apart from other animated films, nor do it’s messages draw a spotlight on a key messages as well as others have done. It’s great fun, beautifully made and full of action and laughs. Not exactly Incredible, but pretty close.

(Release Info London schedule; February 17th, 2020, Prince Charles Cinema, 7 Leicester Pl, London WC2H 7BY, United Kingdom, 9:00pm) https://princecharlescinema.com/PrinceCharlesCinema.dll/WhatsOn?f=15507148 "Come To Daddy" Norval Greenwood (Elijah Wood) is a 'Los Angeles DJ' who receives an invitation to visit his father Brian (Stephen McHattie) after a lifetime of estrangement. The sincere invitation sends 30-­­something Norval to his estranged father with hopes of reconciliation. Norval is a privileged man-­­child arrives at the beautiful and remote coastal cabin of his father, who he hasn’t seen in 30 years. Once Norval arrives at Brian’s isolated seaside home, he discovers that reconnecting with the cynical old man; and fitting himself into his dad’s messy life; won’t be easy. He quickly discovers that not only is dad a disapproving jerk, he also has a shady past that's rushing to catch up with him. Now, hundreds of miles from his cushy comfort zone, Norval must battle with demons both real and perceived in order to reconnect with a father he barely knows. Hope turns to panic, as he uncovers his father’s shady past and is forced to face his inherited demons. Norval is a peculiar character, a somewhat pretentious 'LA' export with a carefully cultivated look; monk cut, pencil mustache, draping layers, wide-­­brimmed hat, limited edition gold phone designed by 'Lorde'. He describes his career in the music industry in the most self-­­congratulatory terms. He's not someone you can pigeonhole. He's a DJ! He produces blazing beats. He tinkles the ivories. He promotes high-­­profile events pertaining to music and the performance of music. He’s maybe kind of an asshole. Norval’s look is crucial to the story, as it firmly establishes the character as a fish out of water in his father’s remote, rural setting. We've to find the authenticity behind Norval’s wilder characteristics. He keeps the emotional truth of that alive, as well; whilst also telling a pretty bloody, funny, genre tale. The isolated house, it’s going to make such a great juxtaposition for the character’s isolation. This is very much a father and son story, and even though it draws pretty freely on what actually happened, that the very core of the movie comes from a son’s love for his dad, and their relationship, and everything that entails. Like the best stories, "Come To Daddy" springs from a deeply personal place. It's really driven by an epiphany after Brian's dying, and just thinking, ‘oh my God, life’s short. Get your act together. The passing of a parent is life-­­changing under any circumstances, but the film expériences the loss in a rather more unusual way. Is it really a good idea to bring the body back after embalmment to spend some time with the grieving family? Living with your father’s corpse for a week in his house. For much of the week, Norval is alone in the house with the body resting in an open coffin, as he sleeps in his father’s bed and wears his clothes. Strangers come and go, paying their respects to a man who sounded nothing like the man Norval knew. They speak about their shared past with him and mentioned faraway places and strange anecdotes, stories from people he had never heard of. It seems to us like they're talking about someone else. During the week, Norval endures dark, intense dreams, and his mind starts playing tricks on him. He returns to his childhood bedroom, surrounded by a lot of bric-­­a-­­brac of his past. It's a strange time. Reading a lot of Roald Dahl's 'Tales Of The Unexpected' and watching many ‘70s 'Giallo' movies. And drinking copious amounts of Rooibos tea, often up to five bags per cup. It feels like a wild amalgam of sly thrillers like Mankiewicz’s "Sleuth" (1972), and Lumet’s "Deathtrap" (1982). Well, that’s really phenomenal and crazy and weird; and right up our alley. This is the exact kind of thing that we’re drawn to, which is kind of off-­­center, kind of weird, kind of dark, kind of funny. Because as many strange, surprising places as "Come To Daddy" goes, it all comes back to that personal core, to that cathartic, eureka moment when your father died. As sons, we always have unfinished business with our fathers. But what happens if that unfinished business comes looking for us? The music of "Come To Daddy" is inspired by 'KPM' stars like Barry Morgan and James Clarke, David Shire’s 'The Taking Of Pelham One Two Three' and Jerry Goldsmith’s 'The Mephisto Waltz'. The music really revolves around Norval and his dad. To speak to that sense of a child's impressions of their hazily remembered father, the film uses a beachy motif derived from play-­­along backing loops recorded in the ‘70s for 'The Mattel Optigan' home organ. This stuff is contrasted with a lot of bass instruments, again to reflect Norval's feelings about his dad, electric bass and contrabass, often combined, as well as the bassier woodwinds using lots of extended techniques that really get close to the player's mouth, and so go to a much less musical and more visceral, almost creepily human, place. That equilibrium between emotional honesty and darkly funny violence makes for an atypical tone distinguishing "Come To Daddy" from many other contemporary films. The film breaks through those expectations and have the audience unsure of where it's going, from dysfunctional family reunion to psychological mindgames to possible supernatural overtones to a wildly over-­­the-­­ top comedic thriller. Psychologically-­­driven chamber piece films, often out of 'The UK' in the ‘60s and ‘70s, are all part of the film’s narrative 'DNA', including "Sleuth" for the cat &mouse twists, Glazer’s 2000 film "Sex Beast" for the jarring lead antagonist and turns from comedy to violence, Losey’s 1963 thriller "The Servant" for the mindgames with those we’re inavoidably linked with, Friedkin’s 1968 adaptation of Harold Pinter’s "The Birthday Party" for the pitch-­­black comedy of menace, and Peckinpah’s 1971 "Straw Dogs" for the simmering violence awakened in the lead. The film is a tribute to this type of cinema. Gritty, character-­­based thrillers that were literate and laced with pitch-­­black humor. The film creates a Pinter-­­esque tale that will immediately drawn in viewers, but then playfully keeps switching gears on them. Just when they've a handle on everything, we chicane again. "Come To Daddy" is a thoughtful, character-­­driven thriller spiked with uncommonly dark comedy and more than a few outrageous turns. One part a retro, ‘70s, 'British' exploitation chamber piece, one part 'J-­­Horror' misdirect and, finally, a full-­­throttle, get-­­in-­­your-­­face revenge thriller. It’s a virtuoso high-­­wire act that will play to the fervor of a raucous midnight crowd, or to the more genteel sensibilities of a Sunday afternoon matinee.

(Release Info London schedule; December 16th, 2018, Electric Cinema, 10:00) "Papillon" Based on the books 'Papillon' and 'Banco', "Papillon" follows the epic story of Henri 'Papillon' Charrière (Charlie Hunnam), a safecracker from the Parisian underworld who's framed for murder and condemned to life in the notorious penal colony on 'Devil’s Island'. Determined to regain his freedom, 'Papillon' forms an unlikely alliance with quirky convicted counterfeiter Louis Dega (Rami Malek), who in exchange for protection, agrees to finance 'Papillon’s' escape. In the glamorous world of Paris in 1931, safecracker Henri 'Papillon' Charrière (Charlie Hunnam) steals a small fortune in diamonds for local gangster Castili (Christopher Fairbank). Though he avoids detection, 'Papillon', whose nickname refers to the butterfly tattoo on his chest, makes one critical mistake; he withholds a jeweled necklace from the unforgiving crime boss and gives it to his girlfriend Nenette (Eve Hewson) instead. In retaliation, Castili frames 'Papillon' for murder, earning him a life sentence at the infamous penal colony in 'French Guiana'. On a ship bound for the remote South American prison, 'Papillon' meets meek currency forger Louis Dega (Rami Malek), who's sentenced to life for producing counterfeit bonds. There, amid thousands of violent convicts awaiting their fate, the two men reach an agreement; 'Papillon' will protect Dega and the stash of money he has hidden. In exchange, Dega will finance 'Papillon’s' eventual escape plan. Upon arrival, the shackled prisoners are met by Warden Barrot (Yorick van Wageningen), who explains the prison’s draconian rules; solitary confinement for anyone who attempts to escape; the guillotine for murderers. As they struggle to survive the nightmarish conditions, which include tropical illness, savage beatings, forced labor and public beheadings, 'Papillon' and Dega enlist the help of inmates Celier (Roland Møller) and Maturette (Joel Basman) to stage a daring escape during a torrential rainstorm. Despite their best efforts, the plan results in 'Papillon' being sent to solitary confinement for five grueling years. Emerging as a mere shadow of his former self, 'Papillon' is transferred to 'Devil’s Island', where he finds Dega waiting for him. Surrounded by prisoners who’ve been driven mad by their time in solitary, the two friends contemplate the hopelessness of their situation. But 'Papillon’s' relentless desire for freedom will not be denied. Louis Dega is arguably the most colorful role in the film. Louis is a character almost everyone will identify with because he’s someone who’s finds himself in a surprising place he knows nothing about. He’s been thrown into one of the most deplorable and miserable circumstances on earth, and has to fight his way through to survive. One of the coolest things about 'Papillon' and Dega is the way they push and pull at each other. In some ways they’re true polar opposites, and that's what helped their relationship grow into what you see in the film. The character's relationship is extremely significant to the story. If that chemistry doesn’t work, the film won’t come off the way it needs to. 'Papillon' allows the audience to see exactly how someone can snap. Not only how they can physically break, but how their mind can deteriorate as well. These two unlikely friends become so reliant on each other that a genuine love evolves between them. And that love allows them to understand not only the other person, but themselves as well. But it’s about the relationship that’s created between 'Papillon' and Dega, who initially hate each other, but who become entirely dependent on each other by the end. 'Papillon' starts as this young, ambitious, egotistical man, and he ends up a completely different person. The film’s emotional journey of self-discovery expects moviegoers around the world. Nenette (Eve Hewson) is an enigmatic French prostitute who romances 'Papillon' before he’s sentenced to life in prison. Nenette is a tragic soul beaten down by life in the Parisian underworld, She’s a smart, interesting person in the way she approaches her ambitions and dreams. She’s not a delicate flower. She’s a fighter. Although Nenette isn’t sentenced for any of her crimes in the film, the character exists in her own personal prison. Nenette and 'Papillon' are partners in crime, like 'Bonnie and Clyde'. She’s desperate to escape Paris because she doesn’t want to be a prostitute anymore. Her ambition is simply to survive, which is in keeping with the theme of the film. For 'Papillon', survival means getting out of prison. But for Nenette, her prison is a life of prostitution. One of the most important characters in the film is 'The French Guiana Penal Colony' itself. Vividly described by Charrière in his novels, the location’s nightmarish qualities needed to be abundantly clear to audiences if the film is going to have the desired effect. Remarkably, there’s a fair amount of documentary footage on the subject. A great deal of history has been written about the penal colonies. In many ways, the penal colony described in Charrière’s novel resembles a Dante-esque version of 'Hell On Earth'. This isn't a summer camp in the jungle. This is a very rough place that stood for more than 80 years. So to tell the story convincingly, the film creates something that's as terrifying as the one that actually existed. For example, the jail that 'Papillon' is sent to in Paris is very different than the prison ship that takes him to 'French Guiana'. And the prison ship is very different than the penal colony in the jungle. Each one has it's own style and personality. The film captures a sense of compression, like the belly of a beast. There’s an element of rebirth when Papillon and the others are spat out onto the beach at the end of their sea journey. The prison ship has so much texture everywhere. It's dark and greasy, and there are fires burning in the background. It gives an intensely claustrophobic feeling. Although it's cold on set, you’d still sweat inside that ship somehow. Few topics have made for more gripping cinematic drama than true tales of incarceration. From the 1932 classic "I Am A Fugitive" to the 1962 biopic "Birdman Of Alcatraz", moviegoers have thrilled to stories that depict real-life prisoners struggling to survive the brutality of institutional confinement. Filled with shocking details about life in one of the world’s most hellish environments, Charrière’s autobiographical novel became a global bestseller when it was first published in 1969 and remains a modern classic in the genre of prison literature. Amid so many acclaimed titles, perhaps none has captured audience's imaginations the way the 1973 prison adventure "Papillon" has. A box-office hit starring Steve McQueen and Dustin Hoffman, the film was based on the critically-hailed memoirs of Henri Charrière, a French thief who was wrongfully convicted of murder and sentenced to life at the notorious 'French Guiana' penal colony in 1931. Based on the epic true story, "Papillon" is a thrilling adventure and a powerful portrait of the resilience of the human spirit, even in the face of utter inhumanity. The story of "Papillon" is set between the years of 1931 and 1945. Whenever you tackle a remake or a reimagining of a classic, one of the biggest hurdles is trying to differentiate it from the original without losing the integrity of the story. The solutithe idea of this film is really to capture an overarching life story rather than to just focus on the escape. The focus is not just about the prison and wrongful incarceration. It goes much deeper than that. Although Charrière’s tale is widely regarded as one of the most exciting prison stories of all time, the new adaptation of "Papillon" transcends it's genre. This film is about much more than trying to escape 'Devil’s Island'. It’s about trying to escape yourself and your past. That's the true appeal of "Papillon". Essentially, it’s a story about understanding one’s true self. The result is a stark portrait of unimaginable pain that will likely move many viewers to tears. "Papillon" contains all the elements necessary for a gritty prison thriller set in one of the world’s deadliest places, but it also includes something else; humanity. There’s plenty of visceral action and compelling drama, but it’s mainly a story of friendship. It’s about people being kind to each other in a very difficult and violent place, and it’s a testament to man’s will to endure. Sadly, much of "Papillon" is still relevant today because many men and women are incarcerated under horrific conditions, and isolation is used as a way to torment them. It’s happening all around the world at this very moment. The emotional depth is one of the favorite aspects of the film. "Papillon" is the chance to revisit the topic in a historical context, while focusing on what makes it relevant to today’s world. On the surface, it’s a thrilling adventure film.

(Release Info UK schedule; Leeds International Film Festival, November 10th, 2019, Hyde Park Picture House, 73 Brudenell Rd, Leeds LS6 1JD, UK, 3:45 pm) https://hydeparkpicturehouse.co.uk/film/greener-grass?screeningID=1924 "Greener Grass" Jill (Jocelyn DeBoer) and Lisa (Dawn Luebbe) live in their perfect homes in their idyllic suburban community with their happy families. Their days are spent in the grocery store exchanging fashion tips and at birthday parties complimenting their neighbor's potluck dips. In this dark comedy of manners, soccer moms Jill and Lisa seek the approval of their friends; at all costs. This surreal world is just on the edge of consciousness; suburbia through the looking glass. Every adult wears painful braces on their straight teeth, couples coordinate meticulously pressed outfits, and coveted family members become pawns in this competition for acceptance. In a day-glo-colored, bizarro version of suburbia where adults wear braces on their already-straight teeth, everyone drives golf carts, and children magically turn into golden retrievers, Jill and Lisa are locked in a passive aggressive battle-of-the-wills that takes a turn into the sinister when Lisa systematically taking over every aspect of Jill’s life. As the women desperately vie for validation, they struggle to maintain pleasantry and normalcy, even when things get weird. And they do get weird. When Jill gifts Lisa her newborn baby in an altruistic gesture, paranoia overwhelms Jill while her fears and anxieties quickly unravel. Meanwhile, The Ref (Londale Theus Jr.), a psycho yoga teacher killer, is on the loose and Jill’s husband Nick (Beck Bennett) has developed a curious taste for pool water. That’s just the tip of the gloriously weird iceberg, a hilariously demented, 'Stepford Wives'-on-acid satire destined to be an instant cult classic. These girls are idiots! They might not have seemed like your typical baseball-cap-wearing, video-village-lurking characters. Jill, in head-to-toe pink with her son Dan (Sutton Johnston) by her side, a golden-retriever wearing khakis and a 'Purple Heart' pinned to his polo. Lisa, with a soccer ball pregnancy tucked up under lavender tulle, both of them wearing braces on their teeth. Years ago, they're put on a house team together at 'The Upright Citizens Brigade Theatre' in New York. They bonded one chilly night when all 'The East' coasters had left early and the two girls are putting the chairs away. There was one piece of a black-and-white cookie left and, like an overplayed 'My Fair Lady' CD skipping, they entered a loop of 'No, please, you've it' and so on. Neither of them ate that piece of cookie that night. And after only a few short half-hours, they threw it away together. And it was at that moment the girls would be incredibly productive working together. Now, Earth to Little Helen (Dot Marie Jones). Would a couple of idiots choose to triple-threat their future? A movie that stars children, a baby, and a seven-month-old puppy. A movie where we chose not to show any vehicles other than golf carts. A movie that co-stars a soccer ball with half a dozen costume changes. And most importantly, a movie featuring so many of our aging friends that we've to make a 'Hail Mary' decision to give every adult in the damn thing braces to look younger. But, alas. Dot Jones can say whatever she wants because she’s a 15-time world arm wrestling champion and we've delicate elbows. But just like non-idiots George R.R. Martin, JK Rowling, and Rand McNally before, they've created a world with it's own logic, hand-drawn maps, and board games based off it. This world is a demented version of suburbia. And who better to satirize oh-so idyllic, polite America than these two Midwestern middle girls? Suburbia has never been so hilariously absurd as it's in "Greener Grass", where two eccentric housewifes are driven by her eagerness to please. In a residential suburb with a killer on the loose, the two housewives compete to have the best children, the best husband and, above all, the most beautiful teeth. In this stinging satire on 'The WASP Community', a baby is given away like a piece of clothing and a child morphs into a dog without anyone being shocked. Politeness is taken to extremes and the realm of appearances reaches the point of lunacy. An overly colorful, deliciously warped version of suburban America that feels like 'The Stepford Wives' at a lawn party and then snuck off to do acid, the film plays soccer-mom frenemies in deranged competition with one another. Golf carts, braces, golden retrievers, soccer balls, and yoga teachers all play way bigger roles than you’d expect. This 'Desperate Housewives' on acid throws a nasty blow at the clichéd image of American suburbia. "Greener Grass" fully commits to a demented version of suburbia as the film scrutinizes the willingness to endure extreme discomfort in exchange for conformity. A deliciously twisted comedy set in a demented, timeless suburbia where every adult wears braces on their straight teeth, couples coordinate meticulously pressed outfits, and coveted family members are swapped in more ways than one in this competition for acceptance. "Greener Grass" explores one’s willingness to endure present pain in exchange for future validation; or at least a perfect smile. The film confirms a gift for outrageous absurdity in this impressive dark comedy full of unsettling behavior.

I Am a Ghost was directed by H.P Mendoza, which is a name most people have never heard. However, he became popular on the indie film circuit when he wrote a script for the 2006 film Colma: The Musical. Since then, he's been involved with a few films, but the most well-known of them all is I Am a Ghost. Made on an extremely low budget and fiercely hard to get hold of until the widespread availability of online streaming, the film was made popular by its premise - what if the ghost was the one being haunted? However, after the initial excitement of there being something new and innovative out, word of mouth made I Am a Ghost a cult classic. It was spoken about on film blogs by film critics, but it is a film which was very much touted by seasoned horror fans, not an unreasonably large marketing budget.  Emily (played by Anna Ishida) haunts a Victorian house in an unknown time period. She goes about her daily life, minding her own business, until one day she hears a voice that seemingly comes from nowhere. It turns out to be the voice of Sylvia (Jeannie Barroga), a psychic who makes a living exorcising spirits from people's houses. Because of that, Sylvia has to help Emily come to terms with the fact that she's dead and help her move to "the other side." The film cost $10,000 to make, and a lot of that was raised through Kickstarter. I Am a Ghost could never have a mainstream release. It's a film that starts with 15 minutes of near-silence; a loop of scenes, each one with an incredibly small variation. Emily feels restless, and so do we. However, just as the audience is about to give up, the story begins to reveal itself and the film kicks into gear. I Am a Ghost, for its budget, is a remarkably well-made film. The lighting isn't the sharpest (although it is functional), but the sound design is brilliant and there is some very impressive make-up design. In fact, the thing this most reminds me of is David Lynch's brilliant short-film series The Alphabet. This is an extremely experimental film from start to finish, and although it has a short running time of 76 minutes, it is one that rewards concentration and patience. On the surface, it's a ghost story, but the entire basis of the film is effectively a conversation between a therapist and patient, and a young woman's attempts to reconcile with her own death. The best thing about this film - and it's the best thing about all abstract films - is that it perfectly straddles the line between the metaphorical and literal. It also doesn't skimp on the horror elements. The end of I Am a Ghost is dark, gory and threatening, and I think it will satisfy the fans who were expecting something visceral. Horror films this unique and exciting are genuinely rare, and it is one of the most interesting horror films I've seen in years. It's ambitious, daring, experimental, and delivers an emotional and an intelligent payoff. It's available to stream on YouTube for £2.50-£4.50 and is well worth the rental price. If you're a horror fan, do yourself a favour and check this

(Release Info London schedule; Sat May 29, 2021, Curzon Soho, 99 Shaftesbury Avenue, LONDON W1D 5DY, United Kingdom/Sun May 30, 2021, Curzon Victoria, 1.1 mi·58 Victoria Street, LONDON SW1E 6QW, United Kingdom/Mon May 31, 2021, Curzon Bloomsbury 0.9 mi·The Brunswick, LONDON WC1N 1AW, United Kingdom, 11:00 AM) https://www.google.de/search?q=the+killing+of+two+lovers&stick=H4sIAAAAAAAAAOPgVeLVT9c3NEwrKjQ0tjAw28SkzsXrWlqUX5Cq75Ofl5KfJ8UGoZW4eJl4_ZxEvbex7tNiKs2-wMS4iFWyJCNVITszJyczL10hP02hpDxfISe_LLWoGAApYU7zWgAAAA&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiYofGNmeLwAhULhf0HHQI2AsEQxyZ6BAgFEAo&biw=640&bih=287#wptab=s:H4sIAAAAAAAAAOPgVeLVT9c3NEwrKjQ0tjAw28SkzsXrWlqUX5Cq75Ofl5KfJ8UGoZW4eJl4_ZxEvbex7tNiKs3excTllpmTG5KZnJ1acoGJcRGrcklGqkJ2Zk5OZl66Qn6aQkl5vkJOfllqUbFCcUZ-eUlmbmoxAG2UKhBxAAAA (Release Info UK schedule; June 4th, 2021, Curzon Home Cinema) https://homecinema.curzon.com/film/the-killing-of-two-lovers/ "The Killing Of Two Lovers" Local odd-job handyman David (Crawford) is trying to keep it together. He and his wife, Nikki (Sepideh Moafi), are going through a time of transition and allowing each other space to figure out whats they want from life and from their relationship. But there's one major issue; David doesn’t want space. Forlorn and frayed, the conflicted David is devastated when he learns that there may be another man sharing his wife’s bed. He just wants things to get better, and he plays along with Nikki because he suspects it’s the only thing that may keep them and their four kids together. His reluctant consent allows him to still visit his four children Jesse (Avery Pizzuto), Alex (Arri Graham), Theo (Ezra Graham) and Bug (Jonah Graham), while holding Niki to mandatory date nights in hopes of fixing their marriage. Now living with his Dad (Bruce Graham), his mental health begins to deteriorate and paranoia consumes his sense of hope, forcing him to confront personal demons in order to save his family and future. He's hotheaded, jealous, and terrified of losing his family. An explosive combination in a claustrophobically small town where private lives seem impossible to preserve; leaving him with only one possible solution. In general, people in life are more complex than we paint them out to be. We don’t know if anyone is inherently all evil or inherently all good. There's a complicated aspect of that. It's really exciting the way we approached it. And for David there's no life outside of his family, so he’s trying to wrap his head around how he will even continue if things go south. His job is a means to an end and he even says, 'I wish I could have had the children and stayed home with them'. David is losing his family and trying to figure out how to fight for them while at the same time giving his wife this room that she’s asking for, which is extremely scary for him. Niki is really in love with two people, which is so complicated to understand when you’re told as a young child that you’ll grow up to get married and only love one person. In the film Niki is loving two people and on top of that her career is blossoming, which is something that was unexpected when she took a job just to take a job and then all of a sudden realized she’s really talented and has skills. And for Derek is interested in settling down and that in his mind, he thinks he may be able to be a part of these children’s lives. He’s dealing with the complicated aspect of loving a woman who has children and a husband, but may be willing to take on all these responsibilities for how much he loves Niki. Then you take all these people who've good intentions in this small town environment and it gets incredibly complicated. The three main characters, David, Niki, and Derek (Chris Coy), continually surprise the audience with the duality of their behavior. We all understand betrayal, we all understand sadness, and if you've a child in your life you understand that love is unlike anything else in the world. It's a gift to be a dad and to have an opportunity to show this thing that we've inside of us just naturally. We never know why David and Niki broke up, we find them just as David is beginning to understand that his wife is sleeping with someone else and this is really all happening for him, he may not be at his dad’s for just a brief stint. The most pivotal moments of the film are defined by epic long takes and stunning wide shots. Think about the rocket scene, it’s like a photograph, framed from the position that Niki would be in if she's taking a picture. What this does is allow us to be in the moment and have all the elements within that moment be rooted to that period of time. The rocket scene, again, is a great example of a memory that would occur. What would the kids remember? How would David and Niki remember this argument? And the other aspect with this shooting style is that, when you film longer takes, you don’t allow the audience to relax, you remove the breathing room that multiple cuts often provide. "The Killing Of Two Lovers" is a story about a father going to pick up his kids who gets into an altercation with his wife’s boyfriend. It's about the period of life that we're in right now. We've seen the marriages of several friends and family members end in recent years and it gets us thinking about our male friends who really define themselves as good fathers and enjoy being fathers. Losing the everyday experience of putting your kids to bed, or sitting on the couch and watching TV with them, caused a few of them to start acting out of character, which is so interesting to us; to see the way in which they responded to this aspect of their life change. The film explores this kind of experience through a character like David because that it’s something you don’t understand until it happens to you. It's also about the idea of masculinity and the role it would play in a situation like this, when a man is fighting for his desired life while at the same time trying to respect his partner, which is a complicated thing to explore in-and-of itself. 'Kanosh' is a town of only 300 people, and it’s a tight-knit community, but houses are dying within that town. Every other block there’s a house falling apart. The landscape is perfect as a background for a marriage, because the onset of marriage is always very beautiful, but the nitty gritty is always more complicated and tight. The possibility of having that background against this intimate town while dealing with a failing marriage would be really valuable. Kids like movies, but we like the organic nature of their touch. The way that they climb over each other and the way they comfortably interact with each other, there’s an element of realism that you can’t really get if you cast actual actors in those roles. It allows us all to live free in the moment and to truly buy into the circumstances. The film is.a transfixing drama without a wasted word or a single inessential scene. It's an absolute marvel in execution that combines the naturalistic, languid life of a one-street town with the simmering suspense of a thriller. Each scene of 'Lovers' threatens to explode as it dives deeper into a torn soul just trying to do the right thing.

The Light of the Moon (Newcastle Film Festival) This gritty, grounded, true to life account of the rape of a woman (Bonnie, played fantastically by Stephanie Beatriz, better known as Agent Diaz from Brooklyn 99) was my top film of the Newcastle Film Festival. The plot takes place over about a month, and we see Bonnie trying to reintegrate herself back into her world of work, meeting friends, having an intimate relationship again with her boyfriend. She jumps from not wanting to talk about, to wanting her boyfriend to talk to her about it, who in turn doesn't know how to react to any of this. He tries to follow the guidelines but that only seems to make things worse. The story is nothing over the top. Nothing that leads her to decide to campaign or go on a revenge mission. Just a woman trying to get her life back to how it was before some unknown bastard decided to take advantage of her. There were only a few stylistic cinematography shots but I felt that that was with a purpose as being too pretty a film would have downplayed the hard hitting context. I doubt that this will ever be a mainstream movie, but I felt it excellently conveyed how easily such an occurrence could happen to someone, and the magnitude of the fall out.

(Release Info London schedule; July 24th, 2020, Curzon Home Cinema) https://www.curzonhomecinema.com/film/watch-the-traitor-film-online "The Traitor" In the early 1980’s, an all out war rages between 'Sicilian' mafia bosses over the heroin trade. Tommaso Buscetta (Pierfrancesco Favino), a made man, flees to hide out in Brazil. Back home, scores are being settled and Buscetta watches from afar as his sons and brother are killed in Palermo, knowing he may be next. Arrested and extradited to Italy by 'The Brazilian' police, Buscetta makes a decision that will change everything for 'The Mafia'. He decides to meet with Judge Giovanni Falcone (Fausto Russo Alesi) and betray the eternal vow he made to 'The Cosa Nostra'. Tommaso Buscetta is fickle and constantly on the move, both in his life and in personal relationships. He’s out of the ordinary, intelligent, charming, effective and endowed with natural authority. A mafioso loyal to 'The Cosa Nostra', but also to his own personal principles, he’s not afraid of challenging authority. From the end of 'The 1970s' to the start of 'The 1980s', he faces the growing strength of 'The Corleonesi', headed by the uncompromising Totò Riina (Nicola Calì). This new small group has no mercy and flouts the basic principles of 'The Cosa Nostra'; they kill women and children and eliminate whatever gets in their way. This group holds no place for Tommaso Buscetta. When in 1982 he moves to Rio de Janeiro with his beloved wife and children, he aims to end his involvement with 'The Mafia'. But there’s no such thing as leaving 'The Mafia', the organization hunts him down. However, 'The Brazilian' police beat them to it and extradite him to Italy. Buscetta then proposes a deal to 'The Italian' judiciary. He’ll cooperate and dismantle 'The Mafia' in exchange for his own protection and survival. He’s soon confronted with the imposing, inflexible and tenacious Judge Giovanni Falcone, and we’re plunged into the depths of 'The Sicilian' organization; murders, shoot-outs and scams. All this provides the backdrop to Buscetta’s account, who turns out to be 'The Cosa Nostra’s' biggest mystery; no one knows why he’s collaborating. He seems motivated by revenge and the desire to dismantle a mafia no longer in line with his values. Buscetta is a traitor for deserting to the enemy, but he doesn’t see himself that way. In the course of his confessions, he highlights the gulf that exists between his mafia and that of 'The Corleonesi'. He intends to do justice to the true 'Cosa Nostra' in this way. Tommaso Buscetta, also known as 'Don Masino', is a fascinating character who left an indelible mark on the history of the fight against 'The Mafia'. Born in Palermo in 1921, the youngest of a poor family with 17 children, he marries early and has two sons by the age of 16. He embarks on a career of crime in 1945 and soon demonstrated his skills, rapidly climbing the hierarchy of 'The Cosa Nostra'. In 1963, pursued by 'The Italian' judiciary, he flees first to 'The United States', then to Brazil. This earns him the nickname 'The Boss Of Two Worlds'. But Buscetta’s empire is to collapse. He's arrested by 'The Brazilian' police, then imprisoned and tortured in Italy. In 1980, he manages to escape from prison and returns to Brazil in order to flee from 'The Mafia War'. After marrying his third wife, Cristina (Maria Fernanda Candido), a young Brazilian with whom he has two children, Buscetta is again arrested by 'The Brazilian' police. Deeply affected by the executions of those close to him, and in particular by the brutal murder of his two eldest sons, he tries to commit suicide by poisoning himself. But his life is narrowly saved and he's extradited to Italy. Once back in Italy, he makes a decision that would change both his life and 'The Mafia". He meets Judge Falcone and collaborates with the judiciary. The information which Buscetta provides 'The Italian' authorities is the most important ever obtained. For the first time, it's possible to weaken 'The Cosa Nostra'. 475 people are charged and 'The Maxi Trial' takes place in Palermo. Buscetta is the key witness and takes the stand at considerable risk. He makes 'The Cosa Nostra' his enemy and, despite the danger, held firm to his course of action. The criminal organization murdered two of his children, further members of his family and friends. The trial ends with 360 convictions. Buscetta then goes further and denounces the links between 'The Mafia' and Italian politicians. Don Masino’s revelations incriminated powerful men like Giulio Andreotti (Bruno Cariello), a former prime minister. To secure his own peace and anonymity, he moves first to Brazil, then to 'The United States', where he spent the rest of his life under 'The US Witness Protection Program'. Buscetta’s greatest victory, however, lay in his demise: after a life full of murder and the settling of scores, he's able to live his final days in peace, finally dying of cancer in 2000. Maria Cristina De Almeida Guimaraes is Buscetta’s third and final wife, as well as the mother of his youngest children. She's Brazilian and much younger than him. Passionate, strong, clear-headed and always present, she's very different from the regular mafiosi wives who lived in their husband's shadows. Cristina is active, intelligent and autonomous, she's a keystone in Buscetta’s life and played a crucial role in his decision to betray 'The Mafia'. Salvatore Riina, born on November 16th, 1930, in Corleone, also known as 'Totò Riina', is nicknamed 'Totò u Curtu' in 'Sicilian' dialect because of his shortness (158 cm) and 'La Belva' ('The Beast') due to his ferocity. Totò is one of the most influential members of 'The Sicilian Mafia'. In the course of his criminal career, he personally murdered approximately 40 people and is suspected of having ordered the killing of 110 others. During 'The 1980s' and in the early 1990s, Riina and his mafioso family, 'The Corleonesi', led a merciless campaign of violence against both rival mobsters and 'The Italian State'. 'The Mafia’s' terror spread within the population and caused the authorities to introduce strict measures, which led to the arrest and imprisonment of Riina and several of his associates in 1993. Sentenced to life in prison, he dies of cancer in 2017 after word of his possible release on health grounds provoked public outrage. Salvatore Contorno (Luigi London Cascio), known as 'Totuccio Contorno' is a former mafia soldier under the command of Stefano Bontade (Goffredo Bruno). He later becomes a witness in 'The Maxi Trial'. Contorno is initiated into 'The Cosa Nostra' in 1975. He's one of Bontade’s favorite hitmen and is also associated with Tommaso Buscetta. During 'The Mafia War', 'The Corleonesi' want to eliminate Contorno, but he's able to escape and protect his family. He decides to collaborate with 'The Italian' authorities, following Buscetta’s example. 'Pippo Calò' (Fabrizio Ferracane), whose real name is Giuseppe Calò, is born on September 30th, 1931, in Palermo, Sicily. He's a very influential member of 'The Cosa Nostra' and is nicknamed 'The Mafia’s Cashier' because of his involvement in a number of money laundering cases. A very close friend of Tommaso Buscetta, he nevertheless chose to support the latter’s principle rival Totò Riina at the start of 'The 1980s'. After several years on the run, he's arrested on March 30th, 1985, and tries in 'Palermo’s Maxi Trial' for money laundering, associating with 'The Mafia', murder and racketeering. He receives two life sentences. He remains an active member of 'The Cosa Nostra' even in jail, where he lives a life of luxury and less influential inmates are his servants. Pippo Calò’s crimes include the bombing of 'The Naples-Milan' train in 1984, which killed 15 people and injured 116. Giovanni Salvatore Augusto Falcone, born in Palermo May 18th, 1939, and murdered May 23rd, 1992, in Capaci, is an Italian judge committed to fighting 'The Mafia'. His assassination is ordered by Totò Riina, head of 'The Corleonesi' clan. Falcone comes to prominence in 1984 when he takes the testimony of one of 'The Cosa Nostra’s' most important informers, Tommaso Buscetta, known as 'Don Masino'. On the basis of this testimony, Falcone opens 'The Maxi Trial' in Palermo in 1986. Palermo’s criminal court isn’t large enough to accommodate the 475 accused who are to stand trial, so a courtroom known as 'The bunker' is created. Falcone asks for additional resources to pursue the fight against 'The Mafia', but decisions aren't immediately forthcoming. Giovanni Falcone becomes a hero and an icon throughout Italy. He also becomes the number one enemy and main target of 'The Cosa Nostra'. The police escort provision isn’t enough to protect Giovanni Falcone. On May 23rd, 1992, he's murdered by 'The Cosa Nostra' in what's known as 'The Capaci Massacre'. "The Traitor" is more the story of Tommaso Buscetta than of 'The Cosa Nostra". Betrayal is a recurrent theme tirelessly explored in film, precisely because it makes us reflect on change. Can a man truly and profoundly change in the course of his life or is it just a pretense? Is change a way of healing, of repenting? Did Buscetta, who refuses the label of informer all his life, embark on this process of healing, of redemption, to become a new man? Or did he create his own justice? In the past, 'The Cosa Nostra' had nothing to do with the perverse entity that it's today. Buscetta collaborates with 'The State' to prevent others from believing in the dignity and honor of 'Fhe Cosa Nostra'. These values have been buried under a mountain of innocent victims.

"Anatomy Of A Fall"     For the past year, Sandra Voyter (Sandra Hüller), her husband Samuel Maleski (Samuel Theis), and their eleven-year-old son Daniel (Milo Machado Graner) have lived a secluded life in a remote town in the French Alps. When Samuel is found dead in the snow below their chalet, the police question whether he was murdered or committed suicide. Samuel's suspicious death is presumed murder, and Sandra becomes the main suspect. Little by little, the trial becomes not just an investigation into the circumstances of Samuel's death but an unsettling psychological journey into the depths of Sandra and Samuel's conflicted relationship.   "Anatomy Of A Fall" portrays the downfall of a couple's relationship. The concept is to depict the physical and emotional descent of a body in a technical manner, symbolizing the decline of their love story. This couple has a son who discovers their tumultuous relationship during a trial that scrutinizes every aspect of their past. As the trial unfolds, the boy transitions from a state of complete trust in his mother to one of doubt, marking a crucial turning point in his life. The film follows this transformation closely. The film wants to incorporate the child's perspective into the narrative and juxtapose it with Sandra's, the main character, for a more balanced portrayal of the events. The film takes on the form of an extended interrogation, with scenes shifting from the couple's home to the courtroom, where characters are incessantly questioned. But there's no sense of realism, it's more a documentary style both in the writing and the cinematography. The film begins with a disorienting shot of a ball rolling down a flight of stairs. This obsession with falling is a recurring motif throughout the film, initially in a literal sense. We're are fascinated with the sensation of body weight and what it feels like to fall, which was sparked by the opening credits of Mad Men, where a man keeps falling.   The film constantly ascend and descend stairs, observing the fall from various angles to unravel how it happened. The film introduces the ball as a symbol of the fall, caught by a dog who looks at Sandra, the central character, and sets the stage for the two and a half hour exploration of her story. It's the battle between a couple with a child, delving into the complexities of time-sharing in a relationship. It's a theme that isn't often explored in cinema and raises important questions about reciprocity, trust, and the dynamics of a partnership. The characters challenge the traditional couple schema by reversing their roles. Sandra's pursuit of her freedom and will creates an imbalance, leading to an exploration of equality in a relationship that is both powerful and questionable. The film invites us to question our preconceived notions of democracy in a relationship and how it can be derailed by dictatorial impulses and a dimension of rivalry. Despite their struggles, the couple's idealism and refusal to resign themselves to a less-than-perfect situation is admirable. Even in their arguments, which are actually negotiations, they continue to be honest with each other, revealing a deep love that persists despite their challenges.   The use of different languages, French, English, and German adds a layer of complexity to Sandra's character and creates a sense of opacity. It also maintains a distance between her and the audience as a foreigner on trial in France, who must navigate her way through the languages of her husband and son. Sandra is a complex character with many layers, which the trial will explore. They do not speak the same language. This makes their negotiation even more concrete, with the idea of a third language serving as neutral ground. It's clear that there's a real love of language and verbal sparring in the courtroom scenes, and Advocat général (Antoine Reinartz) has a lot to do with that. He adds an otherness to the film and brings the contemporary world into it, which breaks the dusty solemnity of the trial. Although he plays the villain, he portrays a very seductive, devious, and flamboyant character. He speaks on behalf of the deceased, whom we hardly ever see, and must make him endearing to both the jurors and the audience. Advocat brings an arena dimension to the court and portrays the civilized violence of the prosecution. On the contrary Maitre Vincent Renzi (Swann Arlaud) plays a rather fragile character, sensitive, on the defensive. He's good but not idealized. It's clear that Sandra and knew each other years ago, and that there's still something between them that's not entirely extinguished.   The film has no flashbacks, the focus is on the spoken word. In a trial, truth is elusive, and there's a void that needs to be filled by the spoken word. And in reality, these exceptions are not flashbacks: in the scene of the argument, it is a sound recording that suddenly materializes on screen, creating a sense of presence. There's also the scene where Daniel reenacts his dead father's words, but it belongs to a different category. This time we've the image, but it's an account of a memory, an invention, or at best, a testimony without proof, as pointed out by the public prosecutor. The courtroom is essentially where our history no longer belongs to us, where it's judged by others who have to piece it together from scattered and ambiguous elements.   Written by Gregory Mann

The first film review I ever posted on YouTube was of Francis Lawrence's Red Sparrow, starring Jennifer Lawrence as Dominika Egorova, a ballerina turned spy. However, in said review, I discuss how the 15-certificate may not be the appropriate rating for this slightly NSFW film. P.S. I am terribly nervous in this video, but we all have to start somewhere.