qatsi: (Default)
It's time for an end-of-the-year post. Lots of things happened in 2024.

At last we got rid of the Tories, although Starmer seems almost as tone-deaf as his predecessor (in either government or party dimensions). It's true, of course, that things can't be fixed overnight, but he doesn't seem to do "hope" particularly well. Locally, the Tories lost the seat to Labour, with a disappointing Lib Dem result, although recently I reflected that perhaps we had taken some votes from the Tories, which would have been important in the final result. I suspect there are quite a few places where the margin of victory wasn't particularly high, and as a result the parliamentary landslide is shallow. Reform are emboldened by Trump's victory in the US and the Tories seem determined to track them rather than attract voters by returning to more central ground. I have the feeling this won't end well.

Given my post from last year, I should observe that since November we've been connected with full fibre. So far, so good. It turns out, in a repeat performance of digging up the roads, Virgin Media is also an option now. It seems everyone apart from BT/Openreach think it's worth laying fibre here. There might be regulatory reasons for that.

A friend, who is a few years older, retired early from their job, precipitated by changes to USS. It was bound to start happening at some point, but nonetheless it was a psychological jolt. For me, work has been a mixed bag and there are definitely some things I don't like about it. Over the holiday period I have been researching, planning and playing what-ifs with spreadsheets. I can't quite access my SIPP yet, but it's getting close enough that I think it's worth contacting Pension Wise in the new year, probably following up with real financial advice. Things would be a lot easier if I thought there were benign economic waters ahead in the next four years.

Anyway, here are some highlights from my year:


Honourable mentions for
The Devil's Flute Murders (fiction); The Subterranean Railway (non-fiction); The Britten Sinfonia and the Will Gregory Moog Ensemble at the Barbican, and Jonathan Scott's Organ Recital and two Kanneh-Masons at the Proms (music); One Life and Moonflower Murders (film, TV and theatre); MUZA in Valetta, the Tarxien Temples and the Ħal Saflieni Hypogeum (exhibitions and visits).
qatsi: (meades)
Yesterday we went to Reading Biscuit Factory to see The Zone of Interest. Obviously a film about the commandant of Auschwitz isn't going to be fun. The dissonant opening soundtrack and blank screen made for a disturbing start. I'm not at all into horror, but I guess one component of that genre is what goes unseen or unsaid, and is therefore left to your imagination, and so it was here. The Höss family are building their ideal life in the Greater German Reich; their particular Lebensraum is a nice house and garden, bordering the camp. The interior of the camp is never seen, but there's a constant industrial-military background noise, continuous smoke from the chimneys, and occasional sounds that could be screams and gunfire. But it's all mundane National Socialist niceties for the family on the outside of the camp with the ultimate in cognitive dissonance, at least until Höss receives news that he's to be transferred to Oranienburg, as a camp inspector. Frau Höss is not happy about this at all, and there is an arrangement for the rest of the family to remain in situ. Höss learns that an operation to deport Hungarian Jews has been named after him, and he will return to Auschwitz as part of that operation. Mild spoiler )Höss, who was hanged in 1947 for war crimes, doesn't come over as being an evil mastermind or having the great enthusiasm for extermination espoused by the leadership; it's his banality as a willing functionary and technician following career advancement that is so disturbing.

Tropes

Feb. 3rd, 2024 04:01 pm
qatsi: (vila)
We went last night to Reading Biscuit Factory to see All of Us Strangers. Overall, it was a good film, but it was too disturbing for me to say I enjoyed it. I found it confusing that Adam's parents were about the same age as him; given that his parents had died in a car crash when he was a child, perhaps they were foster parents, I thought? The time-slip aspect wasn't really clear until later on in the film. And I suppose it had perhaps too many tropes for me: gay men, drug and alcohol abuse, death. I was surprised that it had received a 15 certificate, although I recall there were a long list of content warnings on the BBFC slide. Sometimes I think LGBT+ films could do with a bit more Socialist Realism.
qatsi: (Default)
I went to Reading Biscuit Factory this afternoon to see One Life. As has been regularly observed elsewhere, in Britain it is always 1939. Except when it is 1940, or 1944, or... In this case it is 1938. Nicholas Winton, a stockbroker who lives with his mother, takes a trip to Prague for a week to work with a refugee group. What he experiences convinces him to create a plan to evacuate children to the UK. It is simply fundamental humanity, a visceral reaction to the devastating situation. I suspect many people would be tempted to conjure up some deeper reasoning for this action, though none is required.

Winton returns to London to run the logistics of the operation from this side, dealing with UK officialdom, presented here as stolidly but inoffensively bureaucratic, rather than as a hostile environment, although they do adapt over time as the urgency becomes undeniable to all. The trains come to an end with the Nazi invasion of Poland.

This is not one of those war stories that went unknown and undiscovered - at the time there was plenty of publicity, with Winton campaigning to seek foster parents and funding. But it faded - overwhelmed not least by what followed, I suppose - and the portrayal is ambivalent, with Winton regarding his actions as of little consequence. Eventually in a clearing out of old files it emerges that Winton cannot bear to think about those he was not able to save. This sets in chain events that culminate in many of the survivors appearing in the audience on That's Life - something that sounds way more bonkers than Churchill taking the tube, but truth is in this case stranger than fiction. Hopkins's performance is achingly brilliant, and Johnny Flynn's younger Winton works well too (and the two of them are plausibly the same character). Take a handkerchief.
qatsi: (Default)
I suppose 2023 was officially normal. It was the year Sunak took every opportunity to stay in the gutter when he had a choice to make. Wouldn't it be nice if the rivers weren't full of raw sewage, all the medics weren't on strike and the trains ran on time? It's the little things. Personally, broadband not working for nearly a month, catching covid for a second time, and having the gas hob condemned, was just indicative of the state of the country as a whole. (On the plus side, we now have a nice new induction hob, with which I am very happy; fibre has been laid in the village and I am contemplating the upgrade, although as it is not Openreach we do not have a choice of supplier). The media is talking up a 2024 general election for the UK (well, given January 2025 is the last possible date I suppose it's fairly inevitable). I wouldn't expect things to turn around overnight, but it would be nice to silence the dog whistles and make politics boring again.

Anyway, here are some highlights from my year:

Honourable mentions for
Silverview, The Underground Railroad, and Babel (fiction); British Rail, Venice, and Colditz: Prisoners of the Castle (non-fiction); Alma Mahler and Dora Pejačević, Isata Kanneh-Mason playing Prokofiev and Felix Klieser playing Mozart, and Finlandia and Snöfrid (music); The Herschel Museum, Bath, and Tyntesfield, and Italica, Seville (exhibitions and visits).
qatsi: (meades)
For some time in decline, the demise of Reading Film Theatre at the university was perhaps an inevitable consequence of the pandemic. Fortunately, it lives on at the recently opened Reading Biscuit Factory and I hope it will be showing some films of interest in coming months.

For now, though, my first visit to a cinema since the pandemic was for something more mainstream: Oppenheimer. I'm familiar with the basic story - both the science and the politics - having seen a play from the RSC in 2015, and a TV documentary, possibly from PBS, at some point in the past.

In some ways, the play was more digestible; it didn't deal with the post-war American politics that is one of the major threads of the film. But, obviously, there is a lot more that can be done with film, particularly in the way of manufacturing a town in the desert and testing an explosive. Unlike some, I wasn't bothered by the loudness of the soundtrack, the brightness of the light, Oppenheimer's constant and unshakeable companions as he was tormented by his creation. The investigation that led to the removal of Oppenheimer's security clearance, based largely on transcripts, and the machinations of Lewis Strauss, are portrayed in a very partisan fashion; but American politics is hardly subtle.

Mild spoilers )
qatsi: (Default)
Well, who ordered that? But there must have been some good things in 2020, even if in some cases almost by default: here are mine.


Honourable mentions for I, Claudius (fiction); State of Emergency and In the Shadow of Vesuvius (non-fiction); all those involved in the curtailed season, but particularly Jonathan Scott's organ recital at the Proms (music).

I began the year by escaping from a job I knew I didn't want to one I was unsure of, having been made "an offer I could not refuse" as I was travelling for Christmas at the end of last year. Although I had only one day in the office, and struggled at home with laptop permissions for a while, it has turned into one of those better decisions. Nothing is certain, but it feels like a healthier place to be.

I keep wanting to write with rage about the dual incompetences of our government, but that will keep for next year.

May all our 2021s be filled with needle-waving medics. Unfortunately an online calculator suggests it may be 2022 before I can get vaccinated, but I hope the roll-out will be accelerated as much as possible.

Two films

Feb. 22nd, 2020 10:29 am
qatsi: (lurcio)
It's been a busy week with two films this week at Reading Film Theatre. On Tuesday I went to see 2040. I found myself uneasy at a handful of Extinction Rebellion supporters in the audience; I suppose protest never got anywhere by leaving people in their comfort zones, but they do remind me of the Yes Minister joke that the Greenham Common camp was "a protest against Men, the USA, and Nuclear Weapons - in that order". It also irritated me that the film's opening credits stated that the production had been fully carbon-offset, and began with Damon Gameau boarding a plane. If carbon offsetting is just a matter of paying a tenner extra for a flight and washing your hands of it, then it shouldn't be an option, governments should just legislate for it. But overall the film was better; rather than paint a doom-and-gloom picture of life in the future, Gameau shows us what is already possible, and how it could have a positive impact if more widely adopted. Solar power and micro-grids are no-brainers; driverless cars seem inevitable though always just a bit further off than you had thought; a return to more traditional agricultural and land stewardship methods, but with smarter technology; and giant seaweed colonies to absorb additional CO2.

On Thursday it was the turn of Harriet, based on the life of Harriet Tubman. Perhaps this was selective and dramatised to produce a more entertaining film, but it seemed to have honesty in its essentials, and there were good performances all round.
qatsi: (dascoyne)
As I booked my ticket for Reading Film Theatre, I read the (rather vague) update on the website's home page that the theatre is under threat of closure. It would be sad to lose it; the proposal for a new cinema in the Broad Street Mall isn't going to be a substitute, and the loss of a Europa Cinemas grant presumably can't be strictly due to Brexit if it operates in 43 countries.

Anyhow, on Thursday evening I went to see The Last Black Man in San Francisco. Notionally it's about gentrification, as Jimmie wistfully craves the possibility to reside in his former family home. Following a dispute in the family of the current residents, it becomes empty and Jimmie decides to squat there with his friend Montgomery. They enjoy their time there, although it's marred by a violent death in a group of friends with whom they have an uneasy relationship. But, eventually, harsh reality takes hold, the house is put on the market, and they are thrown out. In fact a fair part of the film is really about self-illusion and denial, as Jimmie clings to the belief, inducted into him as a child, that his grandfather built the house. The story doesn't really begin or end, it just drifts; a lament for the "left behind", perhaps, but full of ambiguity.
qatsi: (meades)
I went to see The Rise of Skywalker between Christmas and New Year; in summary, too formulaic and too much end-of-season Total Bollocks Overdrive.

Last night I went to Reading Film Theatre to see La Belle Époque, which had quite a disturbing opening scene - something along the lines of the Bullingdon Club at the Court of Louis XVI, interrupted by a terrorist attack - quickly revealed to be the latest satirical TV project of Maxime, based on his friend Antoine's business of lavish re-enactment offerings, described as "time travel". Maxime wants his father Victor, an out-of-work cartoonist, to join the project. Victor is disillusioned about modern life in general - in Britain we might well give him a surname like Meldrew - and his marriage is also on the rocks, to the extent that he has been kicked out of the apartment by his wife Marianne and is staying in his friend's apartment ... while his friend has moved in with Marianne.

But meanwhile, Antoine, who was helped as a child by Victor, feels the need to repay a debt and offers Victor a complimentary re-enactment evening of his own. Victor, instead of choosing some historical period with famous figures, selects the evening in 1974 when he first met Marianne. In the re-enactment, Marianne is played by Margot, Antoine's girlfriend. Antoine - clearly suffering from OCD or otherwise "on the spectrum" - micro-manages and directs the scenes, obviously explaining their temperamental relationship.

The whole film consists of so many plays within plays - and from time to time those plays breach their layer and spill over into other realities - that it's hard to keep track, but it is funny, whimsical and moving. The feel-good factor is balanced by the earlier scene showing the potential for the format to turn to the dark side, but the conclusion is inevitable and reached cleverly.
qatsi: (Default)
At the end of 2018 I noted it hadn't been a brilliant year. Well, the same goes for 2019, possibly in spades, and it doesn't look great for 2020 either. But in between, there have been highlights: here are mine.


Honourable mentions for A Vineyard in Andalusia and An English Murder (fiction); 4th Rock from the Sun and The Invention of Air (non-fiction); Canzionere Grecanico Salentino and Queen Victoria's piano (music); Skansen in Stockholm, the Gustavianum in Uppsala (museums and exhibitions).

Perhaps hibernation for the duration would be the best option.
qatsi: (sewell)
Last night I went to Reading Film Theatre to see The Aftermath. The overall atmosphere is melancholic; the story takes place in Hamburg, in the winter of 1945-46; the Germans are still digging out human remains from the city ruins left over from the fire-bombing of 1943. Colonel Morgan, a British officer managing reconstruction, has decided to ask his wife to join him. As a British officer he has requisitioned an impressive and undamaged house, but he also wishes the German occupants - a widower architect and his teenage daughter - to stay in the house rather than join a camp. This provides an obvious source of friction and events develop, in various ways.

Overall, the sense I had of the film is that it's about damaged people who have suffered unbearable losses, and explores the ways and risks of repairing that damage. It's clear from the outset that the colonel has seen the reality of war, and feels that it is now his duty to treat the defeated Germans with respect and humanity, unless and until proven otherwise. His wife initially displays overt hostility to them, but learns that the loss of her son in a bombing raid can be matched to losses on the other side, including Herr Lubert's wife. It is not clearly explained how Herr Lubert avoided military service; this, possibly, poses an explanation of sorts in the delay of processing his de-Nazification papers. His daughter mixes with an insurgent group, possibly based on the Werwolf and its imitators. Of course, she has known nothing but Nazi propaganda all her life. Other British military personnel convey the more conventional, tasteless, uncultured attitude of victors: "we won, you lost, get over it" more or less sums it up. By the end of the film, there may have been some healing, but there is also further loss. I felt some suspension of belief was required for the wider plot, but human nature is often unpredictable and drawn to unlikely scenarios, and it certainly felt quite authentic in much of its portrayal of the period.
qatsi: (baker)
It's been a while since anything at Reading Film Theatre caught my eye; last night, after dealing with the aftermath of an afternoon snowfall on my car at the station car park, I headed in to see First Man. It was billed as a biopic of Neil Armstrong, but really, whilst he is the central character, there's more to it than that. The film opens with one of Armstrong's NASA X-15 flights, in which he barely controls the aircraft at the edge of space, bouncing around the top of the atmosphere. But the action returns firmly to earth with his family life, and the death of his daughter; seeing the opportunity for a fresh start, he applies to join NASA's Gemini project.

There's a slight air of disbelief as the USSR beats them to one milestone after another in the early years of the space race, but Armstrong and the other recruits plough on with the training program, wondering who will get to do what, and whether they'll get to the ultimate prize. Armstrong's flight, Gemini 8, suffers a critical malfunction after successfully completing its docking test; later, the crew of Apollo 1 die in the spacecraft as a result of a fire during testing, and Armstrong is injured when he ejects from a test lunar lander vehicle. All of this weighs heavily on his family, but he remains dedicated to the mission. Both sides of this aspect of the film seemed a bit wooden, as though unconvincingly trying to make a point about his domestic life. There's also a rising background through this period of political questioning NASA's funding (which has continued to be an ongoing sore over the decades), and also of anti-space program protests (which look like a mixture of civil rights, anti-war and anti-austerity protests) which question the program's value.

Of necessity there's a fair bit of fast-forward in the film, so we jump to the successful Apollo 10 mission and finally, Apollo 11. I was impressed by the effects used to show weightlessness; on a lighter note, also by the importance of having a large allen key or socket to open and close the doors. You don't see that in Star Trek.
qatsi: (Default)
The end is nigh for 2018. The only thing that prevents a simple "Good riddance!" is the prospect of 2019 - let's face it, we're not going to be off to a great start given the political disarray prior to Christmas. Still, there have been some high points, so here's the best of the year for me:


Other highlights: (fiction) Two Cousins of Azov; (non-fiction) Come to Finland!; (music) the Tango Prom and the Estonian Festival Orchestra; (film) The Post; (museums and exhibitions) Goscinny at the Jewish Museum, the Ateneum in Helsinki, and the Latvian National Museum of Art in Riga.

No Food and Drink award this year, but special mentions for O'ver and Belgo Centraal, both in London.

It would appear that I predicted my demise at work in 2017's end-of-year post; disappointingly, that proved to be correct. So far, the new job has disappointed (and the Crossrail debacle doesn't help); there is scope for it to pick up in the New Year, but we shall have to wait and see. I don't think it would be good to move too quickly in the current circumstances. If there's no deal, then we shall all be "enjoying" our new "freedom" and blue passports from April; but, provided somebody does something at Westminster, it seems likely that things will drag on for some time yet.
qatsi: (sewell)
I went to see The Post at Reading Film Theatre this week, seeming particularly topical in the current turmoil about fake news, lobbying and corruption. I enjoyed the film, but it's difficult to pin down what it's about - the Vietnam War? the US government? the role of the press? the role of women? All of these, to some extent.

Spoilers )
qatsi: (urquhart)
I went to see Darkest Hour at Reading Film Theatre this week. I had expected it to be quite busy even before the Oscars, and so it was. Conveniently, it follows on more or less directly from my recent reading of Winston's War, as Churchill takes up the office of Prime Minister, and covers the days and weeks of May 1940 leading up to the Dunkirk evacuation.

It's not difficult to understand why Gary Oldman had reservations about taking the part; after all, it's a well-trodden path and you have to feel there is something new to offer. I think he does. The storyline might be hagiographic, but the portrayal isn't; Churchill is, to say the least, a heavy drinker, who keeps odd hours and, despite his personal convictions, is wracked by insecurity, yet, like an actor, when he takes to the stage, he delivers a fine speech. Disliked by most of his own party, by the opposition, and by the monarchy, he has to find ways to persuade them of his cause and course. The attempts by Chamberlain and Halifax to force him into negotiations beggar belief with the hindsight of history; but even in 1940, I wonder, how could they still believe, after all their previous negotiations with Hitler, that this would end any differently? Halifax, in particular, is portrayed here as a malevolent influence; Chamberlain is already a broken man, suffering from ill health, and perhaps recognising his own denial of events.

Did Churchill really sneak off to the Underground? Probably not, and that scene does require some suspension of belief. It's a weak point where the film ceases to be historical and becomes entertainment, but not really convincingly so. It's not altogether impossible, but it risks adding to the already overflowing mythology of someone who was undoubtedly in the right place at the right time, but otherwise would have been a minor irritation in the footnotes of history.

Oldman plays the lead role, but the quality runs deep throughout the cast, and I also felt there were strong performances from Kristin Scott Thomas (Clemmie Churchill) and Ronald Pickup (Neville Chamberlain), and Ben Mendelsohn provides an enigmatic portrayal of King George VI.
qatsi: (sewell)
I'd missed Marie Curie: The Courage of Knowledge at Reading Film Theatre a couple of weeks ago due to illness, so I was pleased that last night I went to see Loving Vincent. The story is principally that of Armand Roulin, whose father, a postman, dispatches him, about a year after Vincent's death, to deliver a letter from Vincent to Theo van Gogh (by this time also dead). Armand travels first to Paris and then to Auvers-sur-Oise, in search of Theo's widow or another suitable recipient. In his task he meets several of the villagers who all have their own stories and recollections of Vincent, some of which cast doubt on the circumstances of his death.

But the story is only a part of the film, and probably wouldn't have drawn me on its own. What is perhaps unique about the film is that it's an animation, produced in oil painting, in the style of van Gogh. I had wondered whether this could be true - surely this could also have been done by CGI, and would have been more cost-effective - but the long list of sponsors at the start of the film, and the long list of animation artists (mostly in Poland and Greece) at the end, verifies it. The result is intensely atmospheric, and very cleverly done, as many of the characters were painted by van Gogh and are clearly based on those paintings. Like The Death of Stalin, there's no attempt to give faux-French accents to the characters, although in some of the flashbacks the voice of Vincent does seem to have a Dutch inflection. Amidst a strong cast I thought the voices and performances of Douglas Booth (Armand Roulin), Chris O'Dowd (Joseph Roulin), and John Sessions (Pere Tanguy) particularly stood out.
qatsi: (vila)
They said at the John Williams Film Music Prom that if he completes the score for the Star Wars nonology, it will be his equivalent of the Ring Cycle. In fact I think it might be longer than the Ring Cycle.

We went to see The Last Jedi yesterday afternoon. Broadly speaking, I enjoyed it. Spoilers )
qatsi: (Default)
So, farewell then, 2017. Better than 2016, but that is setting the bar a bit low. The best of the year for me:

Other highlights: (Fiction) Nice Work (if you can get it) by Celia Imrie, The Spy of Venice by Benet Brandreth; (non-Fiction) The Eroica by James Hamilton-Paterson; (Music) Les Siècles, BBC SO with Semyon Bychkov, The John Williams Film Music Prom, The Fourth Choir; (Film and Theatre) A Man Called Ove, The Farthest; (Museums and Exhibitions) The Museo do Oriente (Lisbon), Hokusai at the British Museum, Hockney at the Tate, Sargent and Jansson (both at Dulwich); (Food and Drink) Restaurante Farol de Santa Luzia (Lisbon); Erebuni (London), Moya (Oxford), O ver (London). After a couple of quiet years for film I've seen quite a few this year; I also appear to be making good use of my Art Pass from work.

I moved from LJ to DW following sinister downtime and changes to T&Cs of the former; it's pretty quiet here, but it had become so there, too.

It's been an indifferent year at work. The move to Bracken House has been delayed until late 2018/early 2019. I survived what has become an annual cull, but whether I will do so next year seems in doubt. It would be a shame to be let go without the opportunity of working there.

From time to time I do feel distinctly middle-aged, and my health hasn't been the best this year, with several trips to GP and dentist, and making use of my employer's private health scheme. Nothing serious has been revealed and I still enjoy generally good health, and what I do have may well be triggered by stress. In general I'm sceptical of that as a cause, but I can see the case that leads there. Work is not stress-free, though it isn't the most stressful job I've ever had; but combined with travel and it does put me under pressure for time.

I probably had a better 2017 than Theresa May, though that's not saying much; I also had a better 2017 than the people who lived in Grenfell Tower. I think that's a significant symptom of the British disease: not investing, or minimally and misguidedly investing, in something, being surprised when it goes awfully wrong, and then finding it is much more expensive and disruptive to put it right. We did that with the trains around the millennium, with a number of high-profile accidents that led to the demise of Railtrack. See also Brexit. Which trains are metaphorically going to depart from which tracks, I am unsure, but I have the feeling 2018 will be an "interesting" year with good and bad in it.
qatsi: (sewell)
Earlier this week I went to see The Death of Stalin at Reading Film Theatre. I'd seen posters on the Tube a couple of months ago, which had seemed to build quite a high level of expectation. Could Armando Iannucci's comic film on the death of a mass murderer possibly live up to its hype?

Spoilers )

In his book on the Second World War, Antony Beevor discusses Stalin's "retreat" to his dacha in 1941 after the German invasion, and suggests that he expected to be arrested when the Politburo members came to visit him (although he also speculates that this was a feint to uncover any disloyalty). That's an interesting counterfactual opportunity. I suspect Stalin's reputation within Russia (as opposed to internationally) today rests largely on his role as wartime leader, with other aspects of his ruthless leadership conveniently sidelined; had he not been given that opportunity, but instead been removed in 1941, how would he be viewed today?

The cast works well: I particularly enjoyed the performances of Simon Russell Beale (Beria), Michael Palin (Molotov), Steve Buscemi (Khrushchev) and Jason Isaacs (Zhukov). It's both funny and thought-provoking, which is how it should be.

Profile

qatsi: (Default)
qatsi

May 2025

S M T W T F S
    123
45678910
11 121314151617
1819 2021222324
25262728293031

Syndicate

RSS Atom

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags