What was the last film you watched?

[Willie Oleson]

LET HIM GO (2020)



A perfect little old-fashioned melodrama featuring great performances from the main actors, plus a "Darlene Snell" type of villainess, plus a sexy-brooding Indian.

 

[Willie Oleson]

GASLIGHT '40 vs. GASLIGHT '44

I accidentally watched the original on you-know-where because I assumed it was the more well-known version. I enjoyed it very much and straight afterwards I rented the remake from Prime.

Technically speaking the remake is better (no surprise there, I suppose) but not in a way that benefits the story.
Charles Boyer is more convincing as the Eurotrash criminal except that it doesn't really matter if the villain is Eurotrash or not.
Ingrid Bergman's character is more generous with the histrionics as is to be expected in that kind of situation, but it doesn't necessarily make the situation look more believable.
The remake does more, like adding an intentional quirky character and showing more scenery, but nothing about that felt like an improvement on the original.

The humour in GASLIGHT '40 feels casually/naturally added to the scenes.

Cough cough cough

Does my pipe bother you?

Without a whiff of sarcasm:

No, not at all.

The very irritated piano player.

Pling plang plong PLANG! PLONG!

The final scene, desperately holding on to his precious rubies.


To summarise the ongoing global feud between the two different GASLIGHT fanboys: it's a choice between Ingrid Bergman and Anton Walbrook.
It goes without saying that Ingrid Bergman does a great job in this film and the many other films she's made, but Anton Walbrook is simply the bigger GASLIGHT powerhouse.
The story is not a mystery, it's clear from the very beginning what's going on and I think that makes it more fun to be "in cahoots" with the villain.
Unlike Charles Boyer's character, Walbrook plays the gaslighter so Dickensian evil that it almost becomes sexually attractive.

Even when he pays his wife a compliment ("you look lovely tonight") it sounds like a cruel insult.

The sets are a bit smaller and crammed with stuff (I LOVE the pampas plume decoration) but it intensifies the terror of "what happens behind closed doors".
The deviousness of the maid happens more unexpectedly but Angela Lansbury plays it equally entertaining.
All things considered, the British GASLIGHT is the best.

 

[Snarky Oracle!]

GASLIGHT '40 vs. GASLIGHT '44

I accidentally watched the original on you-know-where because I assumed it was the more well-known version. I enjoyed it very much and straight afterwards I rented the remake from Prime.

Technically speaking the remake is better (no surprise there, I suppose) but not in a way that benefits the story.
Charles Boyer is more convincing as the Eurotrash criminal except that it doesn't really matter if the villain is Eurotrash or not.
Ingrid Bergman's character is more generous with the histrionics as is to be expected in that kind of situation, but it doesn't necessarily make the situation look more believable.
The remake does more, like adding an intentional quirky character and showing more scenery, but nothing about that felt like an improvement on the original.

The humour in GASLIGHT '40 feels casually/naturally added to the scenes.

View attachment 56635

Without a whiff of sarcasm:


The very irritated piano player.
View attachment 56636


The final scene, desperately holding on to his precious rubies.
View attachment 56637

To summarise the ongoing global feud between the two different GASLIGHT fanboys: it's a choice between Ingrid Bergman and Anton Walbrook.
It goes without saying that Ingrid Bergman does a great job in this film and the many other films she's made, but Anton Walbrook is simply the bigger GASLIGHT powerhouse.
The story is not a mystery, it's clear from the very beginning what's going on and I think that makes it more fun to be "in cahoots" with the villain.
Unlike Charles Boyer's character, Walbrook plays the gaslighter so Dickensian evil that it almost becomes sexually attractive.
View attachment 56638
Even when he pays his wife a compliment ("you look lovely tonight") it sounds like a cruel insult.

The sets are a bit smaller and crammed with stuff (I LOVE the pampas plume decoration) but it intensifies the terror of "what happens behind closed doors".
The deviousness of the maid happens more unexpectedly but Angela Lansbury plays it equally entertaining.
All things considered, the British GASLIGHT is the best.

Yes, I bought a set with both versions for my increasingly-elderly parents. They watched them repeatedly.

I'm afraid it might've killed them.

 

[Toni]

GASLIGHT '40 vs. GASLIGHT '44

I accidentally watched the original on you-know-where because I assumed it was the more well-known version. I enjoyed it very much and straight afterwards I rented the remake from Prime.

Technically speaking the remake is better (no surprise there, I suppose) but not in a way that benefits the story.
Charles Boyer is more convincing as the Eurotrash criminal except that it doesn't really matter if the villain is Eurotrash or not.
Ingrid Bergman's character is more generous with the histrionics as is to be expected in that kind of situation, but it doesn't necessarily make the situation look more believable.
The remake does more, like adding an intentional quirky character and showing more scenery, but nothing about that felt like an improvement on the original.

The humour in GASLIGHT '40 feels casually/naturally added to the scenes.

View attachment 56635

Without a whiff of sarcasm:


The very irritated piano player.
View attachment 56636


The final scene, desperately holding on to his precious rubies.
View attachment 56637

To summarise the ongoing global feud between the two different GASLIGHT fanboys: it's a choice between Ingrid Bergman and Anton Walbrook.
It goes without saying that Ingrid Bergman does a great job in this film and the many other films she's made, but Anton Walbrook is simply the bigger GASLIGHT powerhouse.
The story is not a mystery, it's clear from the very beginning what's going on and I think that makes it more fun to be "in cahoots" with the villain.
Unlike Charles Boyer's character, Walbrook plays the gaslighter so Dickensian evil that it almost becomes sexually attractive.
View attachment 56638
Even when he pays his wife a compliment ("you look lovely tonight") it sounds like a cruel insult.

The sets are a bit smaller and crammed with stuff (I LOVE the pampas plume decoration) but it intensifies the terror of "what happens behind closed doors".
The deviousness of the maid happens more unexpectedly but Angela Lansbury plays it equally entertaining.
All things considered, the British GASLIGHT is the best.

Now I want to see the original GASLIGHT! In Spain the Bergman one was retitled "Luz que agoniza" (Light in agony) more poetically, I guess, though the Franco censors had nothing remotely poetic in their obscure minds...

This is, very likely, the oldest Spanish "program"
for the movie (you know, what we were given at
the theatre for FREE, not that I can remember it).​

 

[ClassyCo]

The wife and I decided to watch some of those old, sometimes cheesy, sometimes better than one might think horror movies with animals as the primary antagonist. We've been in this groove for the last three or four weeks.

So far, we've watched:

ALLIGATOR (1980)
ALLIGATOR II: THE MUTATION (1991)
GRIZZLY (1976)
DAY OF THE ANIMALS (1977)
ORCA (1977)

These movies have varied in quality, but I'd argue that each of them have done a good job at ironing out their own viewpoint and train of thought.

I was particularly fond of the tongue-in-cheek vibe of ALLIGATOR, although I didn't like that they had a small kid eaten by the title killer in a swimming pool.

ALLIGATOR II was probably stronger than the original in some areas, but it had a dud of a finale, which left us feeling underwhelmed and a little cheated.

GRIZZLY was straight slasher, but with a grizzly bear as the killer instead of a man with a knife. It honestly reminded me a lot of the original HALLOWEEN and FRIDAY THE 13th, even if it predates both of those genre-starting slashers.

DAYS OF THE ANIMALS might've had the simplest, but creepiest premise of everyday people participating in a family-friendly hike, only to have their adventure ruined by animals. It got sloppy, though, and lost its direction quickly.

ORCA is probably the best of the batch we've watched so far. Sure, the story of an Orca taking revenge on a seaman is a little "out there", but the production values and performances were good. One YouTuber calls ORCA "the best JAWS ripoff", but that's up to debate.

Of course, I wouldn't say any of these movies make any statement. Nearly all of them know exactly what they are -- cheesey horror -- and they ride right into that full force.

We enjoyed the ride, though.

 

[Toni]

Not "Piranha" 1 & 2 (the cast is full of supersoap character actors!)? I am doing the same thing with possession, haunted house and killer kid movies! It´s a true guilty pleasure...!

Guess who´s eating Digger Barnes #2 tonight?​

 

[Toni]

I watched "Empire Records" a couple of nights ago. I expected nothing, so I did enjoy it a lot. It´s a sort of perfect companion to "Reality Bites" and "Heathers": a group of rebellious teenagers let their emotions go and have fun while facing the consequences.

Liv Tyler and Renée Zellweger are here in their, what? early twenties? Renée is super-thin and cute, and plays the b*tch, and Liv is the virgin who wants to be Renée but deep inside, is the most romantic of all. The story happens in 24 hours, and it´s truly entertaining and unwillingly sweet. It´s a derivative of the "let´s save this business" trope, but totally works.

Among the other cast-members are others who went on to (or came from) better things: Anthony LaPaglia ("Whithout a Trace"), Rory Cochrane (the best of the ensemble, and the cutest too), Robin Tunney ("Prison Break", wearing a Sinéad O´Connor look), Ethan Embry (later memorable in "Grace & Frankie"), Johnny Whitworth ("CSI: Miami"), and last but not least, actually the very least of all, is Miles Colby, who plays here a parody of one of those flamboyant heartthrobs of the 90s, very tanned, stupid and narcissistic (as in "The Colbys"...).

Highly recommendable if you wanna watch something fun with a message of love for life underneath.
Note: Don´t watch the trailer or you´ll get some spoilers...

 

[ClassyCo]

Not "Piranha" 1 & 2 (the cast is full of supersoap character actors!)? I am doing the same thing with possession, haunted house and killer kid movies! It´s a true guilty pleasure...!

View attachment 56681

Guess who´s eating Digger Barnes #2 tonight?​

Keenan Wynn is also in ORCA.

 

[Seaviewer]

SNOW WHITE (2025)

this umpteenth presentation of Snow White And The (Uncredited) Seven Dwarfs.

This was on TV over the weekend. I found it an enjoyable update to the story and did notice that they managed to avoid the word "dwarf" altogether - even the subtitles identified them only as "miners".
I liked how they fixed what I've long thought to be the flaw in the original story - the fact that with her father dead Snow White was the rightful queen of her own kingdom. Instead of riding off with the prince, he should stay as her consort - which is effectively what happens here.

 

[Mel O'Drama]

The Knack... And How To Get It (1965)

One of those films that I've always known only by its (fairly self explanatory) name. Beyond that I've never explored, though I'm sure over the years I'll have seen its name associated with certain actors.

Seeing Richard Lester's name in the credits gave me mixed feelings. I know his Sixties vehicles include those Beatles films but - never having seen those - my mind instantly goes to him ruining the tone of the Superman film series with an overload of quick and "comedy". Still, I made peace with continuing by telling myself this film was billed as an actual comedy anyway.

Given the director, the time in which it was made and the cast, I was expecting it to be zany and a little weird in a Swinging Sixties kind of way, and it certainly was that. This is not a film I could sit down and watch most of the time. I feel I would have to specifically want a hit of Sixties surrealism. It feels very experimental in tone, from fourth wall breaking to a character who paints everything white (including the window panes in a room he's already treated) to a scene in which Michael Crawford's character gets stuck in a loop of repeatedly running down a flight of stairs and closing a door whilst repeating the same phrase.

Speaking of repeating words, there's that prolonged sequence in which Rita Tushingham's character - having been on the receiving end of Ray Brooks's sexual advances - has fainted and comes round apparently convinced she's been raped. For the next five to ten minutes, the only word she utters is "rape", and each time she does so it's in a different tone or volume. She shouts it, stammers it, whispers it and even sings it. She disturbs people in the street to say it and knocks on doors to say it ("not today", says the old woman who answers). It's played mostly for laughs, which is telling of the wide gap between 1960s and 2020s sensibilities. At the same time, it arguably foreshadows the 21st Century with Swinging London representing the freedoms of social media and with her character wanting to fit into sub-movements that are part of this new world, even if she does so inauthentically. At times it seems she doesn't actually believe her own claims, but is getting back at the men (plural, since her accusations shift from one to another) with a false allegation. After one cry draws a particularly large number of people's horrified attention, she throws a victorious look at the men she's accused and contorts her features up into a kind of "nyaah nyaah" face. Where things diverge is that in Sixties Britain, the men (and, apparently the writers) decide that her accusations are driven by a fantasy for which the cure is a good seeing to. A definite sign of the times.

There is a darkness to the characters' behaviour which is acknowledged. Brooks's lothario swooping in and "dominating" women with his seduction techniques is watched with some horror by his housemates, and his actions seem all the seedier because of the wide-eyed innocence of both Crawford and Tushingham's characters. In a way, Brooks is playing the pantomime villain, with the viewer rooting for the two innocents to find their happy ending.

Above all else, this is a nice little time capsule of Sixties London. The streetscapes - the cars, clothes and telephone boxes - look charming, quaint and inviting.

As for the cast: Rita Tushingham is at her most winsome. Ray Brooks is really interesting casting for the roué character. He's not classically handsome, nor does he radiate blinding amounts of sexual energy. But there's just something about him that makes me believe it all. I've met men like him who objectively are rather ordinary but just have The Knack and are never short of a sexual partner or two.

Meanwhile Michael Crawford is already demonstrating the physicality for which he would go on to be renowned. He can be seen doing stunt after stunt here, from jumping off moving buses to falling down stairs. At one point, when he is pursuing Tushingham's character who has been whisked off on a motorbike by Brooks, the bike whizzes down an alley (or gully/ginnel/snicket/tenfoot). They whizz under the camera, then the camera pans up to show they have just gone under Crawford, who is wedged between the wall either side by his feet and shoulders, casually lying out and smoking a cigarette as though he is on a chaise longue rather than suspended in mid-air. It's a very memorable shot.

 

[Edie70]

Documentary FAYE (2024) about the actress Faye Dunaway.

 

[Seaviewer]

Seeing Richard Lester's name in the credits gave me mixed feelings. I know his Sixties vehicles include those Beatles films but - never having seen those - my mind instantly goes to him ruining the tone of the Superman film series with an overload of quick and "comedy". Still, I made peace with continuing by telling myself this film was billed as an actual comedy anyway.

Michael Crawford is already demonstrating the physicality for which he would go on to be renowned.

My mind of course goes immediately to the Beatle films but Lester also directed the 1967 anti-war comedy How I Won the War starring Crawford and (somewhat improbably) John Lennon.

 

[Angela Channing]

M3GAN (2023)

The cute doll that becomes the scary doll that becomes the killer killer doll has been done many times before in films but rarely as good as this.

Cody is a young girl whose parents die in an accident so she has to live with her Aunt Gemma who is a engineer and toy designer at a major toy manufacturer. Her current work is on M3GAN (Model 3 Generative Android), a life-like artificial intelligence doll who learns from its environment to develop into a more customised play mate for the child to which it is assigned. Cody becomes attached to M3GAN and the android helps her to deal with her bereavement but M3GAN becomes overly protective of Cody in the process with murderous consequences.

Although I've read some people describe it as a horror film, it isn't really although it does have a few scary scenes in it. It's more of a thriller and there are some really anxious moments in it. I totally loved the film and thought it was clever, interesting, funny and tense and well worth watching.

I previously said I loved the original M3GAN film so I was looking forward to seeing...

M3GAN 2.0

The unimaginative poster should have been a clue that this wasn't going to be anywhere near as good as the original. M3GAN 2.0 attempts to build on the eerie charm of its predecessor but just a formulaic film leaning heavily on recycled plots and predictable scares. M3GAN has been revived to take on a Amelia, another AI robot that has gone rogue. Part of the plot reminded me of Terminator 2, but a very poor and less exciting version. Not particularly scary, not particularly thrilling.

 

[Mel O'Drama]

Longlegs (2023)

The image on Prime and their and one-sentence description gave me Nineties crime procedural vibes. I knew better than to hope for The Silence Of The Lambs, but had hopes it might be in the vein of the raft of thrillers that followed it: (Copycat, The Bone Collector, Seven, etc.).

I kind of got my wish. Like most of the films above, it pairs the determined young newbie with the seasoned, world-weary old-school pro, and has one of them haunted by an earlier trauma. It gives us the disturbed serial killer.

Of course there's the dark, dark cinematography. Which isn't a criticism, since it looks sumptuous and shadowy, with warm orange light occasionally piercing the gloom. One thing this film has in spades is atmosphere. And some moments and imagery are disturbing.

The casting is interesting enough. Most of those names with which I'm familiar are playing roles unlike anything I've seen them play before. I forgot I'd seen Alicia Witt's name and consequently didn't recognise her for the entire film. Possibly not entirely surprising since I'm most familiar with her as the smart-mouthed Final Girl from 1998's Urban Legend and as Cybill's smart-mouthed daughter. Still, though, this is a definite departure. Likewise, I mostly know Blair Underwood as one of the prettiest of the PYTs on L.A. Law so spent some time wondering "is he/isn't he"?

I didn't know the lead actress, which was a help as I was able to appreciate her performance on its own merits. Must confess had I seen photos of her with platinum blonde hair wearing next to nothing before watching the film I may have pre-judged.

It's a shame the film announced "And Nicholas Cage as Longlegs" over the opening credits, since I'd like to have experienced this performance without the potential judgement attached to his reputation from various poor vehicle and character choices. I don't think I would have recognised him, which would have been a plus for me. They should have held off on showing his name until the end, like with Kevin Spacey in Seven (this film ripped off Seven's backwards-scrolling end credits, so why not go the whole way). As it is, I couldn't help being taken out of the story by thinking how strange it was to see him made up like an eccentric great-aunt*.

Wish fulfilment can ultimately be unfulfilling, and that was the case here. Tonally, it did indeed tap into those Nineties crime procedurals, but I found myself feeling frustrated that I could see bits and pieces of all of them that didn't fit to a cohesive whole. It ended up feeling more like a poor man's recreation than a love letter. The character of Longlegs began to irritate me for the same reasons. The performance combined mannerisms and traits that have been praised in other antagonists who are big characters in their own right: Buffalo Bill; Pennywise; Joker; Leatherface. There's a lot going on here. Too much. Which is a symbol of the film overall. It feels everything but the kitchen sink is thrown at it in the hope that something sticks and lands with the audience. For me it just tries to be too many things to too many people, and ultimately feels very needy.

This shows in the plot as well. As a straight procedural it would have been a better film, but it then overcomplicates things by going into more supernatural genres. The warning bells come early in the film, with allusions to the protagonist's psychic abilities. I possibly could have made peace with this. And the satanic worship element was fine. But combining both, and throwing in (I kid you not) dolls that control people's minds just took it from potentially sublime to ridiculous.

Despite my comments, I found it watchable and thought it was a very promising film... The very reason it ended up disappointing.


​

* The film was apparently criticised for transphobia due to its lipstick-wearing serial killer, but I see this element more as an accidental byproduct of Cage attempting to channel Heath Ledger/Joaquin Phoenix/Ted Levine/Whoever Else in the hope of receiving the same level of adulation.

​

My mind of course goes immediately to the Beatle films but Lester also directed the 1967 anti-war comedy How I Won the War starring Crawford and (somewhat improbably) John Lennon.

Wow. That's certainly an unlikely pairing. Looking at the cast I see a lot of familiar names from the world of British light entertainment, so consider this one added to my viewing bucket list.

 

[Mel O'Drama]

Heretic (2024)

I was pleased to watch this with little knowledge of the film, other than the poster of Hugh Grant looking a little sinister, and a brief synopsis on Prime about two missionaries knocking on the door of a host who plays cat and mouse with them (and the latter was, frankly, too much information. Can't we just hint rather than giving away anything beyond the first act?).

Something about the description gave suggestions of The Perfect Host with David Hyde Pierce, and The Owners with Sylvester McCoy and Rita Tushingham, both of which are kind of home invasion films in reverse. There are indeed similarities, with the difference here being that the people who enter the house with dark secrets are there trying to do good, even if they still have their agenda. They might be evangelists, but they're also somewhat invited guests at this home, since they have a list of people who have expressed interest in their faith, rather than knocking on random doors asking people if they've thought about their afterlife today.

It has to be said that I came close to aborting my viewing during the lengthy opening scene with the two girls on the bench. It was one of those "trying too hard" moments where the more it tried to clobber the audience round the head with its "naturalistic" dialogue, the more contrived it felt (the "detail" where the girl mispronounced pornography several times was particularly forced, badly executed and unfunny).

I'm very glad I persevered, though, because these faltering steps were far from representative of the film as a whole, and it really came to life the moment Hugh Grant opened the door. And, thanks to some deft writing and direction, the two female actresses turned out to be quite watchable as well, bouncing wonderfully off his intensity.

Hugh Grant greatly went up in my estimation when I watched Florence Foster Jenkins a couple of years ago, I felt he had potential to give a great performance here and really he did deliver. He swings effortlessly between being disarmingly charming and... something else entirely. The uncomfortably inappropriate turns the conversation quickly took really made me feel that sense of being on guard and questioning if it was just a bumbling series of mistakes or something much darker. All of which made good use of his image as the hapless, "nice-but-dim" romantic lead.

He has some terrifically memorable monologues and diatribes throughout, most of them regarding the way faith is sold and bought as he turns the tables on the messengers who become his captive audience. Like this one where he draws parallels between certain faiths, board games and the plagiarism thread that ran from The Hollies to Lana Del Ray via Radiohead.

If it has a failing, it's some of the situations being a little too extreme. In particular the discoveries made in the latter part of the film relating to other occupants stretched credulity and lost some of the reality that had, up to that point, made it so very unsettling.

Even so, this one was definitely worth a peek, and I'd probably watch it again.​

 

[Seaviewer]

Miracle on 34th Street (1973)
To mark "Christmas in July" this year I thought I'd watch this TV remake which I haven't seen in quite a long time. It used to be shown regularly, presumably because it was in colour, but when colorisation became a thing the original returned - until the 1994 remake came along. Now they don't show any of them but I have the original on DVD.
The first thing you notice is how fast Kringle walks, the whole thing is like it's on speed, and everyone speaks so sharply to each other. They've added scenes to explain things that don't need explanation, eliminating the miracle, but at the same time left out much of the character interaction.
The one thing that I really like remains the moment when Tom Bosley's judge adds his grandchildren's letters to the pile on the bench - but why did they think it was better to have the hearing in camera? It removes all the atmosphere.

 

[Monzo]

I saw the Lithuanian film "Slow," in which a dancer and an asexual sign language interpreter meet and fall in love. As they begin a relationship, they must figure out how to develop their own kind of intimacy.

It's the kind of film that's worth talking about because there are details that make me question whether it's realistic or not. In any case, the film is thought-provoking.

 

[Mel O'Drama]

I've watched a couple of films over the last evenings. First up was...

Billy Elliot (2000)

Why it's taken me a quarter of a century to finally watch this, though it's been somewhere on the periphery of my radar almost since the beginning.

I've since watched Jamie Bell as an adult actor in a film or two - most notably that pointless Fantastic Four film (or, as it was written on poster, "Fantfourstic"), so it was a little surreal to see him here as a mini version of who he would become. And he was just that, because this film takes a really refreshing approach to its focus on children. They're not the usual cutesy creatures we usually see - infantilised versions that match up with how adults see children. They're simply smaller people, honestly written and speaking as I remember peers speaking when I was their age. Whether he's interacting with adults or children, the writing and delivery for Billy is consistent. His awards - including a BAFTA - were well-deserved.

Julie Walters (who also scooped a BAFTA and other awards for this role) was a nice surprise as I had forgotten she was in this until I saw her name on the opening credits. She's never less than wonderful, and as reliable as ever here, with lots of lovely little touches, such as the funny visual early in the film where she walks between two rows of children practicing ballet, leans in to physically move Billy's leg into the correct position, then casually retrieves her lit cigarette from the girl behind Billy, into whose hand she has propped it (I must confess some concern as to her character's motives early in the film after the close up of her touching Billy's leg. When Billy later outright asked if she fancied him, it was a relief to see her amusement).

Such little visual treats are to be found throughout the film. Stephen Daldry's direction weaves in some quirky little moments without ever becoming distracting. An example of this would be Billy looking at a girl on the other side of the road.. a bus goes by and after it's passed she is nowhere to be seen. Visually, the film is also a love letter to mining towns, the working class and 1980s childhood. The rows of terraces with their are vividly shot, juxtaposing with the bleak colliery. There's a real sense of community here, with the people dotting the streets and back lanes adding to the rich texture. As the poster says, it's "an indelible portrait of time and place" and one can almost taste the mid-Eighties here.

Like Pride - which I watched a year ago (though it feels like a couple of months) - this is set against the grim backdrop of the miners' strike. Here, as there, there is a joyful vein running through the film that would feel entirely inappropriate were it not for the fact that it feels it's honouring the principles and struggles of the people who were facing terrible difficulties whilst being maligned by both the press and the evil government causing the financial difficulties (Thatcher's "the enemy within" comment is referenced here once again). There's an incredibly powerful scene where Billy's dad gets on the '"scab"bus to go to work in order to raise funds to get Billy to London. He is seen by his horrified older son who breaks into the colliery and convinces him not to give in. It's an efficient way of showing the desperation faced by the miners, bringing it to life in the context of this story.

While I liked the scenes with Billy's cross-dressing friend having a crush on him, I really wasn't mad on the Michael we saw as an adult who was evidently both gay and dressed as a woman. It just seemed too much, and was arguably an unhelpful image (most gay men I've met don't cross dress. And most trans people I've met aren't gay. I'm sure there are exceptions, as here, but I just don't know what the takeaway would have been for a mainstream audience in 2000). I did like that Billy's reaction was to be both uncomfortable (as would have been the norm the era) and ultimately accepting. And yet still conflicted enough to punch out another boy who touched his arm while calling him a "bent bastard". It's ugly, but very truthful given the era and Billy's background.

I also feel the film could perhaps have gone a little harder and darker in terms of the opposition from Billy's family to his dancing. The household is made up of Billy and two miners (his father and older brother), and while their aversion and prejudices were touched upon, I felt they were won over just that bit too easily. But I suppose it can't go on forever and we have a running time of less than two hours in which to tell the story.

All told, a really nice little film that I would watch again.​

 

[Mel O'Drama]

Last night's film was...

Denmark (2019)
AKA One Way To Denmark

Late last year, I watched a charming Timothy Spall film called The Last Bus in which a depressed loner with no real family left went on something of an odyssey which centred around one almost focal idea. This slightly earlier film, which stars Timothy's son Rafe Spall, has many of the same themes. Whereas The Last Bus was about taking the characters late wife's ashes on a cross-country bus journey, Denmark sees our main character wanting to get himself locked up in a Danish prison, after watching a documentary about the high quality of their living conditions, in order to escape his current life living in hardship and unable to get a job in a former mining town in South Wales (IMDb says it's Tredegar in Blaenau, Gwent, but the main street seen most frequently is Senghenydd, as can be clearly seen written on the name of the pharmacy, which is easily found on street view where many of the same landmarks and signage can be seen).

Rafe's South Walian accent is impressive. If I didn't know who he was he'd have had me completely fooled. The dialect and its rhythms used for the Welsh sequences are entirely authentic. There's an area-specific authenticity that adds to the "fish out of water" element once he reaches the calm relaxation of Denmark. And once we're in Denmark it's enjoyable to hear people speaking the native tongue without subtitles, and yet understanding what's said or meant by the tone and looks (particularly the frosty mother who disapproves of this Welsh neanderthal entering her habitat... and potentially her daughter).

There's an interesting journey for the audience. His second thoughts about getting himself arrested all made sense so that by the time he decided in desperation to go ahead with it all the same, I found myself holding my breath and trying to will him to stop. I suppose it's ultimately a film about trying to connect and finding someone who can see and accept him, but there's a lot of sadness underneath it all. Lines like "life became more about dying than living" are, in context, incredibly profound.

This isn't a film to watch with expectations, because it won't meet any of them. And the fact that it's so surprising is exactly why it needs to be watched.

Incidentally, as I watched I had my Timothy Wests and Spalls mixed up and convinced myself Rafe was the son of Prunella Scales.​

 

[Seaviewer]

Fatal Attraction (1987)
Another classic I'm just catching up on.
It begs the question of how much viewers are expected to know going in. The title alone gives something away, and even at the time the publicity was fairly obvious about how things would go. Only the final few moments contained anything that had not been telegraphed in some way.