rogerjdkemp Reviews

Communion (2013)

You will want to watch this all the way through and won't be disappointed.

[9/10 · 20 October 2013]

This film had my riveted to my seat from the beginning to end. You don't often experience that. It felt like a piece of literature and, although British, is passionate (we are not known for showing our feelings!). Overall, a very real piece.

A film that will linger in the mind.

A priest is delivering a sermon, when a tear rolls down his cheek, and splatters onto the text he is using. Odd. Why? He descends from the pulpit into the real world, tearing off his vestments as he does so. The congregation is stunned. We hear from some of them later what a wonderful man he is, how he helps so many through their troubles. What is going on? We are on a journey in that rare thing for England, a road film, following two people who each have little luggage but are burdened by different secrets. They each try to cope with inner demons.

Is the priest having some crisis of conscience? Now he sits in a pub. Two yobs begin to abuse a couple; the man is white, the woman black. The man tries to stand up for himself until faced with a Stanley knife. The priest watches and is sad. What can he do? He leaves. He goes to his car, starts the engine, but does not get in. Inside he goes to the boot, pulls out a baseball bat and returns to the pub. Two yobs then hit the floor. Don't mess with the priest! We sense something big is going on here. This priest is full of feeling, not some cartoon nutter. He is overdosed on compassion. We learn that over and over again. From beginning to end we find ourselves skewered by the tension, almost scared to bat an eyelid in case we miss something.

There are several tiny flashbacks, almost subliminal.

What the hell is going on? We shan't be pleased if we don't find out. We don't want this to fizzle out to nothing. Fear not. This journey will end. The tension will be lanced, and all will be plain. I bet you do not guess. You may even shed a tear.

The priest continues to drive his blood-red car, passes a large van, and hears a girl scream out. He can do nothing, drives on, then, in a moment, thinks better of it, and returns. Out comes the baseball bat and St. George kills the dragon and rescues the princess from the now stationery van.

She is a punk backpacker from Mexico City , who immediately recognises he is a troubled soul. Indeed she calls him the Killer Priest and she is not wrong. He is a troubled man, and she has empathy with him. He is dangerous, but not to her. She feels safe with him. He tells her she is a good person. He saves her. Later she returns the favour.

Under her charm, she too is troubled. She is bright, yet is tormented, something she conceals with humour. She says to him that he does understand her. He cannot understand. Nor, for that matter, can she understand him; he cannot even understand himself. And we understand little until the end! A curious relationship between them is formed. A bond.

Just what the hell is going on?

This had better be worth the trip. It is. Oh boy isn't it just! You get your moneysworth.

Apparently, this film was shot within about two weeks or so. It was produced on a tiny budget yet is well shot, well written, well-acted and gripping. Some films cost millions, and you just can want them to end. This one cost next to nothing, and you wish it went on.

It is thoughtful, dramatic, funny, full of feeling. I am glad I saw it. I shall be doing so again very shortly. There is a lot to take in. They say a work of art is something that moves you. Well, this worked for me.

The Iron Rose (1973)

Odd, and you want to see it again.

[7/10 · 21 March 2013]

Girl meet boy. He asks her out. His choice of places is somewhat unusual. First they visit what appears to be a graveyard for old steam trains (a joy for the train spotters I should think), then off to the local cemetery, because it is quiet.

The girl is somewhat scared when he wants to enter a tomb, and he seems to enjoy this. Then she agrees to join him in the tomb, and they make love.

And we are treated to a fully-dressed clown wandering around the cemetery, like they do not. What on earth is that supposed to be about? I think it was Chekov who said that when you have something in a short story, then it must have to be there. So if you have a gun, it has to go off. And when you have a clown, the clown has to do something, be a pivot for something. This appeared to be pointlessly weird.

Essentially this is an over-long short story. There is something in it, but the central point is not wholly clear. If I were to have a stab at it, I would say the boy was trying to frighten the girl , then she becomes more fascinated by the whole experience than he is, then he becomes terrified. Has he driven her mad? Was she mad already? To that extend it was similar to Hamlet, but only to that extent.

Not a lot happens for much of the film. Early on , I guessed where it was going, save for the very last part. Quite what it was about is that clear, but strangely that is a good reason to watch it again. It is not rubbish, and certainly very odd.

Starlight Hotel (1987)

An absolute delight.

[10/10 · 21 March 2013]

I have watched this film many, many times. Kate, a young girl watches as her father leaves to find work. She has no mother, she is sad. She is late for school and made to stand in class, then picked on by others during the break. Whereupon he decides to runaway.

Earlier she had met a swagman who tells her if you want to do something, do it. This man later crops up as various times during the film. He exudes benevolence. Then Kate meets Patrick, who is clearly on the run. At first he does not even realise she is a girl. Rather reluctantly, certainly on his part, they link up. She is a nuisance he could do without. There are times they are going to go their separate ways, but cannot. On one occasion, Patrick rushes after her when he fears she is being picked up by a stranger ; another time she saves him being beaten up. They relationship becomes close.

Clearly their relationship is going to be very important to both of them for the rest of their lives. They will never forget. This film is real, not sentimental. The two central actors work wonderfully well together, and are very sympathetic characters. They both deliver the goods magnificently . The director is clearly on the side of the under-dog. Those in authority do not come out of it very well. And that includes a man who is trying to start a riot.

The scenery, the light, is amazing. I cannot fault this fault. This is one of my favourite films. If you have not seen it, give it a try. It is moving, but also have much humour. At one point they are rowing, then Patrick literally falls in the mire, then gets covered in feathers. They then both laugh. Such is their relationship.

A real delight.

Irina Palm (2007)

Memorable and moving

[10/10 · 16 July 2012]

Maggie, who sees herself as a middle-aged frump, is on a mission. Her small grandson is dying, and his only hope is treatment is in Australia, thousands of miles and, more importantly, pounds away. Her son and daughter-in-law do not know how they will manage it (and if they will manage it), while Maggie, with no experience of work, desperately tries to find a job to help pay for it. And so she ends up working the sex trade in London's Soho, and a specialised branch of it at that. No experience required. That is Maggie's secret. No one must know she works in the sex trade, not her son or his wife (who she does not get on with), and, above all, not her nosy friends and neighbours. This film turns conventions on their head. She is doing something she knows it "right" (no question of that in her mind – the ends justify the means), and she equally knows she will be condemned by her family and peers if they find out what she is doing. She tries to tell her small grandson she is going to sort it all out, that it is a secret, and a secret is not a secret is what say what it is. So we end up with a middle class woman of a certain age entering a totally alien world. Her employer's character is interesting "I hate people"), and develops from his cold promise that he will kill her if she defaults on a promise. I do not know how realistic it was, but in fact he came across as a good employer, unlike, say, banks. And Maggie becomes a success. But one day the fact she works in the sex trade, what she archives has to come out. The reactions of the family, friends and employer are dealt with extremely well. We are all heroes and villains, just some of us do not seem to realise that. I felt that the sort of people who condemn someone is her position really ought to see this film. They may realise that life is not that simple. But I doubt they will. Marianne Faithful was excellent in this role, and is an interesting choice to play Maggie. The actor who played the sex trade employer catches perfectly. He would be a very difficult man to know. Jenny Agutter revealed the true character of the person she played. It certainly brought out a reaction in me. The son was in a very difficult situation. He did not seem to grasp that a desperate disease requires a dangerous remedy. But who would in his terrible position? I found the tying up of the knots, and particularly the end, moving. I was impressed by this film . I feared it would be dreary. How wrong can you be!

Let the Right One In (2008)

You don't have to like vampire films to like this.

[13 November 2011]

I am not a fan of vampire films, or indeed much interested in horror, Gothic or otherwise. But I have found an exception. And this is it. I read a review and it did not sound that interesting, but I watched and stayed with it and am glad I did.

The story was simple but fascinating. It is about the relationship of a boy, who is being bullied at school, and a girl of the same age who he meets, and the film centres on their relationship. It is a vampire film seen from a very different perspective and you feel sympathetic towards the vampire. Like Hitchcock, the director suggests rather than shows, and the horror element is slight, but vital.

So if you get a chance to see it, give it a try. You may be surprised.

Cloud 9 (2008)

Cloud 9

[2 November 2011]

The film poses the question : what do we do when we can the chance of some happiness, and someone else may be hurt as a result? Ignore it if it makes us feel guilty, or give into it and accept that there will be a price to pay. And it is a good question as happiness is such an elusive quality. Igne has been with ( and presumably married to) Werner for some thirty years. They are fond of it each other, content with each other, but their relationship is dull, maybe always was. He loves trains, likes watching film of trains, travelling on them, reading about them, telling their grandchildren about trains, a man obsessed. Meanwhile Inge unexpectedly feels a strong attraction to Karl and for the first time, late in life, and goes off Werner's rails. She is torn ( "I didn't want this"), still fond of Werner, but drawn to Karl. She confides in her daughter Petra who is glad her mother is happy, who tells her to say nothing to Werner. But Inge cares so much for him, she tells him. It is a truly remarkable performance from Ursula Werner. The scene when she learns of the death of Werner is wonderfully moving. The direction is excellent and subtle. I liked the scene of the morning after she tells Werner and the camera is static as she walks around their flat not knowing whether to disturb him, finally knocking on his bedroom to find (we presume) he has gone out. She no longer knows what he is doing. And the scene at the funeral where Inge is frozen with true grief as people line up to formally comfort with. It is a very "real" film. All the actors distinguish themselves. I found this film compelling from the beginning to the end. It is genuine, heartfelt. The question is impossible to answer but I felt sympathy for the plight of Inge. We do the best we can. Time spent watching this film is not time wasted.

Stage Door (1937)

A surprisingly good film

[9/10 · 24 May 2003]

I had never heard of this film, but just viewed it a few minutes ago. I wanted to see it because of its cast ((Katharine Hepburn, Ginger Rogers and a very young Lucille Ball in a small role. It was based on a play and I dreaded it being stagey. It is not.

The script is witty (best lines to Ginger Rogers who acts very well), and Katharine Hepburn. There is no mood music, no special effects, just good acting and a simple, but for all that, powerful little plot. At one point the fiery Rogers lashes out against Hepburn, then regrets it. The scene where she is contrite is silent and moving. The emotion is genuine.

The script of this film does not insult the intelligence, and the film itself I found enjoyable. In fact prior to writing this I have already recommended it to someone else.

The Golden Eels (1979 TV Movie)

A Moving Film

[10/10 · 22 March 2003]

I have seen this film on two occasions, and some years ago, but it has stuck in my mind. Like many powerful films, there is little action. But it is very atmospheric, very real and touching. It is set in East Europe during the Second World War and is centred about a small boy who lives in a small village, his relationship with the local poacher.

The poacher is always talking about the great harvest of golden eels, but this only occurs rarely. It emerged the small boy is Jewish (the poacher is not). One day as they emerge from the woods they see the boy's father being arrested by the Germans, and retreat back to the forest. The poacher talks of the golden eels - of hope. And what will they do if the eels arrive...Might not sound much. But it is. Watch it if you can.