Child 44.

A grand cast doesn’t always equate to a grand film and one such case in point is Daniel Espinosa’s Child 44 (2015). Espinosa you may remember was the director behind the best of the Easy Money trilogy Snabba Cash (2010) and two of the stars from the trilogy appear in this latest movie, Joel Kinnaman plays Vasili Nikitin a middle-ranking officer in the Ministry of State Security (MGB) and Fares Fares who plays Alexi Andreyev. The main star and the films narrative backbone is the popular British actor Tom Hardy who plays Leo Demidov. As a child Demidov was orphaned during the Holodomor[1] in the Ukrainian SSR that took place in the 1930’s but manages to escape from the orphanage and is taken in by some kindly Soviet soldiers eventually becoming a war hero. After the war Leo Demidov becomes a MGB agent and uncovers a series of child murders but the MGB leadership refuse to except the death as murders because Soviet doctrine states that murder only occurs in capitalist country’s “There can be no murder in paradise” One of the dead children is the son of Leo’s best friend Alexi Andreyer and even he does not believe that his son has been murdered! The female lead in our story, which incidentally is based on a novel of the same name published in 2008, is another favourite of Movie Ramble Noomi Repace who plays Leo’s wife Raisa. When Raisa is accused of being disloyal to the state Leo refused to denounce her, both are sent to the town of Volsk and given demeaning jobs.  Both suspect that Vasili Nikitin is behind their downfall. Other well known and respected actors the calibre of Gary Oldman, Vincent Cassell, Paddy Considine, Charles dance and Tara Fitzgerald all have prominent roles in the movie.

 

Even a cast this good can't rescue this movie. 

But as I said at the beginning of this ramble a well known and respected cast does not always mean that what we are about to see is going to be something to rejoice over and I must say that this is true in the case of this movie. On the face of it this should have been an exciting mystery thriller but I’m afraid it’s completely lacking any real excitement, Its far to long, the story is made too complicated when there is no need to bogged down with unnecessary subplots.  The heavy “Russian” accents of the various actors force you to put on the subtitles to help understand what’s being said. Perhaps someone could explain to me why the story was not centred on the murder mystery, why the film was not made with East European actors with undertitles and why everything had to be so dark? The Ministry of Culture had the good sense to block the screening in Russia, as did other Eastern Block countries - but it was made available on DVD in these same countries even Russia has a bargain bin!

---

[1] A man-made famine in the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic in 1932 and 1933 that killed an estimated 2.5–7.5 million Ukrainians, with millions more counted in demographic estimates. It was part of the wider disaster, the Soviet famine of 1932–33, which affected the major grain-producing areas of the country.

Dawn of the Planet of the Apes

Different director and mainly different actor’s set the sequel to the first of the reboot of the original Planet of the Apes series, 2011’s Rise of the Planet of the Apes apart from Dawn of the Planet of the Apes (2014). This latest in the series is set ten years after the end of the first movie and we find the remains of humanity struggling to cope with the aftermath of the plague and to stay alive. To hold civilisation together the humans need electric power and the defunct power plant is in the middle of ape territory!  The intelligent community of apes are still lead by Caesar (again played by Andy Serkis) who begins to loose control after giving permission for the humans to access the power plant, but not all members of the ape community are happy with Caesar’s decision.

 

If you go down to the woods today your sure of a big surprise!

As well as Serkis the film stars Jason Clarke, Gary Oldman, Keri Russell, Toby Kebbell and Kodi Smit-McPhee. Written by Rick Jaffa and Amanda Silver who were involved in the first of the rebooted series with the addition of Mark Bomback who is also the executive producer. Matt Reeves, who was responsible for directing Cloverfield (2008) and the English language version of Let The Right One In (2008) is a good replacement for Robert Wyatt and is also set to direct the third film in the franchise War for the Planet of the Apes.

 

A little sentimentality goes a long way.

Similar to Rise of the Planet of the Apes we get another example of some first class escapist entertainment but underlyingly the story highlights the way so called ‘superior classes’ treat people when they don’t always understand their way of life and their different beliefs - so look beyond the obvious narrative to get the best out of this movie.

There looking forward to the next film.

Meantime.

Mike Leigh’s oeuvre is always worth revisiting whether it’s his TV work or his feature films. Meantime (1983) was the eighth of nine features he made for British TV in the 1970’s and early 1980’s and the only one not for the BBC. This, the first of his overtly politicised films, was produced by Central television for Channel 4 and premiered at the London Film Festival in 1983 before it was shown on television in December the same year.

1983 was the fourth year of Margaret Thatcher’s reign and the similarities between her policy’s and these of the David Cameron right wing government following 2015’s General Election are uncanny with the blame for the counties ills being laid squarely in lap of the ordinary working people who have to suffer the austerity forced upon them whilst the real villains, Bankers, City of London and the rest of the rich establishment are not only let of scot free but are getting wealthier. The disaffection shown in the film is to a very great extent the same that is being shown via social media today and could quite easily erupt into something far more dangerous. 

This was the first of three films by Leigh that came out of the Thatcher period and does a grand job of getting into the emotion of the times. The grim prospect of permanent unemployment looms large over the narrative. It was while Leigh was making a previous film that he heard about the suicide of two young kids who died together because they were both on the dole and felt they had no future. Although Meantime was not about this incident it did start the directors thought pattern with the main point of the film being unemployment and the work schemes that the government had produced which were for short time employment only and amounted to very little.

 

Mark.

The movie, like many of Leigh’s films and plays, uses as its driving force the family unit. Our family live in a tower block, Bryant Court, Whiston Road in the East End of London, they are struggling to keep a float during the recession. Father Frank, (Jeff Robert) a man with responsibilities and a home, but because of the fact there is no work he is a man who has lost his dignity, leaving him bitter and frustrated. Frank is married to Mavis (Pam Ferris) who attempts to keep the peace between Frank and his two sons when there frustrations regularly erupt, all three men sign on at the Benefits Office together. The more outspoken of the two brothers is Mark (Phil Daniels), a very intelligent young man who under different circumstances should be able to make his own way out of cesspit created by Thatcher and her henchmen. The landscape of life at the time did not offer the Mark's of this world an opportunity to work and therefore building up their self-respect. His brother Colin (Tim Roth) is quite simple minded and at times easily led, but we can see quite easily right through Mark’s bravado that he loves his brother and tries to protect him, witnessed when Mark rescues him from the influence of the local bad boy, a skinhead called Coxy (Gary Oldman). The narrative underlines the contrast between the world of benefits, tower blocks and a poverty existence and Mavis' s sister Barbara (Marion Bailey) and her Bank Manager husband John (Alfred Molina) middle class existence. They live in a nice semi detached in Chigwell, an affluent part of north London, in what appears to be a rather loveless marriage.

 

Colin.

Again we find that Mike Leigh has produced an excellent film with no written script, finding the actors and developing and producing the story. Each actor creating and researching his or her own backstory. Uncannily the members of the ‘family’ look like they could be related! It was Alan Clarke that had recommended Tim Roth who plays Colin in this his first feature film role, and was only Gary Oldman’s second feature film in what would become a long and distinguished career. Marion Bailey is Leigh real life partner and had worked with him before and since, recently as Sophia Booth in Mr Turner (2014).

 

Coxy.

The film is honest in its depiction of life in 1983 Britain and at spelling out the feelings and aspirations of the characters and their lives.  None of the circumstances that the two brothers find themselves in can obscure the fact that they love one another. It's obvious enough that Frank and Mavis are not to blame for their circumstances and that they cope as well as they can with their economic problems and unemployment and lack of cultural stimulus, Mavis’s only outlet is a Bingo game! To me it is clear that Barbara's feelings towards Mark are due to her sexless relationship with her bank manager husband, the question of having children is raised but never explained? Barbara’s plan for Colin to work in her house on a painting and decorating project is used as a metaphor for those useless Tory short-term work schemes. Therefore as I have opined unemployment is certainly the driving force behind the movie. Who is worse off Barbara or Mavis, Barbara has choices whereas Mavis does not, based on this Mavis is the worst off of the two sisters or is she? Have human condition changed in our modern world with its class and culture clashes: would Mark get a politically motivated job, would the state stand by Colin, will a now retired Frank and Mavis be the same as we left them only collecting the State pension?

 

David Cameron in drag? 

A tragic and honest discourse, which mirrors modern Britain, but one that retains an important sense of humour.  Shot around the East End of London with location shooting even taking place inside an actual lift! It has a remarkable cast and is one of Mike Leigh’s most important films and one that should be revisited in the austerity ridden world of 2015!

Bram Stoker’s Dracula.

For me the Robert Burns Centre Film Theatre is far more than just a place to watch movies, for me it’s a haven, an escape from the pressures and stresses of life. It’s a place I have fallen in love with over the years, where you meet friend’s and acquaintances and have conversations with complete strangers about film. Its run and staffed by people, some of which have worked there for over 25 years, who give the impression that would not care to work any where else, people that always make you feel at home and your visit enjoyable.

One member of the staff Ms Susan Kenny is in the last semester of her third year of an MA in Liberal Arts at the University of Glasgow on the Dumfries Campus. Susan’s options for this particular semester where either to continue with classes as usual or deliver a proposal for a placement in a working environment. She pitched a suggestion for a week long Academic Film Festival that would bring together the University and its students along with Film and RBC. Which would have the additional benefit of introducing new young people to the Film Theatre. Both of the RBCFT Film Officers were more than happy to encourage and mentor Susan.

The first film in her programme was quite a coup; she managed to land an unreleased American documentary that had never been screened without the director being present. By using her persuasive powers she not only convinced Doctor Randy Olson, a marine biologist turned filmmaker, to allow her to show his film Sizzle: A Global Warming Comedy (2008) but to take part in a Q&A via the medium of Skype. After screening mainly documentary’s to her student audience the closing event was a feature film with Doctor Ralph Jessop, one of the University of Glasgow’s emanate lecturers in Literature, leading the post-film discussion with Victorian Literature, Art and Philosophy students and one or two visitors.

Count Dracula and Mina Harker.

Very much based on Bram Stokers 1897 classic novel Dracula, Bram Stokers Dracula (1992) is powerfully directed by the man that gave us such near masterpieces as The Godfather Trilogy (1972-1990), The Conversation (1974) and best of all, Apocalypse Now (1979). Francis Ford Coppola and his screenplay writer James V Hart set out with the deliberate intent to make this film as close as possible to Stokers original text, going as far as including a prologue to demonstrate that Dracula was a direct descendant of Vlad the Impaler an Eastern European Prince from the House of Draculesti, also included was the novels diary and letter format which was cleverly used as a narrative device. The film also makes reference to previous movies about the vampiratic Lord of Darkness including Nosferartu: A Symphony of Horror (1922) and the Hammer Film Company’s ‘depictions into the deeper tendrils of Victorian naughtiness and gothic mischief[1]’. The film starred a rather convincing Gary Oldman as Count Dracula, Winona Ryder as Mina Harker for whom the Count has a deeply obsessive love, Anthony Hopkins plays Professor Abraham Van Helsing a character best known as a vampire hunter and the archenemy of Dracula with Keanu Reeves type cast as a pathetic Jonathan Harker.

The discussion that followed this gothic love story was slightly more academic than the normal RBC’s Film Club discussions, but was extremely interesting to this observer. They included the link between blood and menstruation, erotic sexual lovemaking and the symbolism of white wax oozing down a candle, and the fact that all the erotic sequences featured oral sex! We touched on the violation of the Christian sacrament and how the film demonstrated the liberalisation of women.  It was agreed that it was a difficult book to adapt for the screen in a way that does not loose the meaning or ‘feel’ of the original, but it was pointed out there was considerable more humour in the film than in the book.

Although the main character was obviously in contravention of normal behavioral patterns Coppola’s film encouraged the viewer to have a certain amount of sympathy for his humane interpretation of Dracula and the man’s rather unorthodox wooing of Mina Harker.  Although the colour had slightly faded the Blu-ray copy of this film sounded and looked very good.  It’s only left to thank Susan for all her hard work putting on this Film Festival and to wish her success with her Dissertation.

The book and its author.

---

[1] Susan Kenny 2013.