Social Items

TPQ
Showing posts with label Film Review. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Film Review. Show all posts
Anthony McIntyre ðŸŽ¥ Local soccer in Ireland is on the up. 


That much seemed evident from the 600 viewers who turned up to watch Underdrogs at the TLT on a cold and icy Friday evening. I went along with my match day companion Paddy. It was well worth the tenner spent on the ticket. Value for money every which way. While we had a couple of pints in the venue bar, I successfully coaxed him to join me in the traditional hip flask ritual! He drives to games so never has the opportunity to imbibe, unless it is a cup final in Dublin which, last year, we journeyed to by train, neither of us candidates that day for passing a breathalyser. Not by a country mile.

For Christmas my wife gave me a Drogs hat and scarf which I was only too eager to wear. On the way out a woman with a Derry accent commented that I wouldn't happen to be a Drogheda supporter. It was an echo of what Kevin Keegan said to me at the Helix a few weeks ago when along with Paddy and Andrew, I stepped up to have my photo taken with the best player ever to turn out for the Anfield side. Decked out in Liverpool FC regalia the former European Footballer of the Year said it wasn't hard to know what team I supported! I sort of wear my sporting heart on my sleeve.

The short film directed by Conor McGuinness and Sean Matthews is about the recent history of Drogheda United, its woes and its wins, its fans and its future. Two years of hard work went into making the film, with over one hundred interviews conducted along the route. Prior to the showing, the packed out venue was treated to an onstage discussion, the speakers being coach Kevin Doherty, team captain Gary Deegan, and new signings, Frantz Pierrot and Jack Keaney. David Sheehan, the LMFM broadcaster, functioning more as an interlocuter than interviewer, was ideal for managing the exchange.

Featuring a few times in front of the camera was local councillor Joanna Byrne. It was pleasing to see her get the recognition for the effort she has put in to promoting the team. Her 'family bleed claret and blue.'  She had taken her first steps as a toddler on the pitch and even regaled the audience with tales of  going to games with various boyfriends. I have also stood on vigils for Gaza with her over the years, so have an affinity.

The film also gave a lot of time to local volunteers with the club which underscored one of the central themes being projected by the directors - Drogheda United is embedded within the community. While in need of a new stadium the current location, Weaver Park, speaks volumes about its place within the community. Easily accessible even to those walking to the game, it is a comfortable ten minutes by foot from the town centre. The theme music for the film also had a local character, being the work of local musician, composer and producer, Breifne Holohan.

Much of the footage focused on life behind the scenes in Drogs' second and third seasons back in the Premier division. On top of that the audience was treated to some of the great goals the Drogs had scored over the years.

Those who follow the Drogs will be familiar with Gary Deegan, still going strong at 36 and a firm favourite amongst young fans in particular who rally to have a selfie taken with him when the opportunity presents itself. Despite the years being in a constant tug of war with the fitness levels, which ultimately only the years can win, the captain still very much enjoys being a soccer player. Jack Keaney told the story of a brush with Gary Deegan while playing against him once for either Sligo or UCD in which he called him a granda! No doubt, the big centre back learned not to teach his granda how to suck eggs. 

A great night which saw the proceeds going to the Gary Kelly Cancer Support Centre. Unlike some of the games we have attended when the result went the wrong way, none came away disappointed. 
 
⏩Follow on Twitter @AnthonyMcIntyre.

Underdrogs

Brandon Sullivan ðŸŽ¥ against a backdrop of the ongoing war between Hamas and Israel shares his thoughts on a 2012 film directed by Dror Moreh.


Frequent contributor to TPQ Frankie asked in a comment:

Am I the only Quiller (not the death toll) that thinks fair play to Hamas for embarrassing Mossad....

I'll leave aside my own thoughts on this, and apologise for pedantry in advance, but the main agency that will be embarrassed by the astonishing attacks carried out by Hamas will be Shin Bet, who are responsible for preventing such attacks, a task they took over from Mossad in recent decades.

I only know this because of an excellent documentary and accompanying book which I watched and read back in 2012. Having watched the news avidly this weekend, and feeling fairly gloomy at the inevitable Israeli onslaught against some of the most defenceless people in the world, I re-watched the documentary to review it. It remains a riveting and vital piece of work.

Interestingly, I think the first time I contacted AM at TPQ was when I saw this film. Someone had written some graffiti on the cinema celebrating the Sabra and Shatila massacre. I took a photo, sent it in, and it was published.

The film consists of archival footage and interviews with all of the surviving heads of Shin Bet. Sometimes, cutting-edge technology is used to present a photo as a 3D landscape. The effects are hugely effective.

It's worth taking a moment to discuss the surviving heads of Shin Bet before getting to the themes discussed in the documentary. Their names and years of their leadership are noted below.

Avraham Shalom (1981–1986)

Yaakov Peri (1988–1994)

Carmi Gillon (1995–1996)

Ami Ayalon (1996–2000)

Avi Dichter (2000–2005)

Yuval Diskin (2005–2011)

Diskin, a man who looked the part (along with Ayalon in particular) discussed how he felt after "targeted operations" to kill "terrorists." Like all of the leaders, with the exception of Shalom, he was reflective, and thoughtful, and seemed to carry a burden of responsibility. But, all that said, Diskin still gave the orders to kill, many times. Diskin was 11 when the Six-Day War broke out and was heavily influenced (some might say radicalised) by a book called If Israel Lost The War. . Diskin noted that even when he carried out a "sterile" operation with no "collateral damage" he still felt uneasy about the power that he could wield. About the Israeli campaigns against their enemies, Diskin simply states that they had "no strategy, just tactics." This thought is supported by Ayalon who notes at the end of the film that Israel "wins every battle but loses the war."

Avi Dichter uses an anecdote to discuss the misunderstanding between Israelis and Palestinians. Israel needed to know how many people were under its control in the occupied territories and, so, it sent soldiers, including Dichter to count them. They learned how to say "we have come to count you" but hadn't learned to accent the word so it would be properly understood by the Palestinians between the doors they banged on. When asked by frightened civilians what the heavily armed young men wanted with them, they were informed, albeit inaccurately, that "we are here to castrate you" rather than "we are here to count you." As with all of the other leaders, Dichter appears open and willing to embrace his former enemies and committed to a political settlement. It's therefore disappointing, and confusing, to see that he is currently a minister in Bibi Netanyahu's government.

The avuncular Yaakov Peri discussed the "identifier technique" when, as a young soldier, he could occupy a village or town, herd all the military-aged men into the middle and then use an informer, hidden behind a mask and in a vehicle, to point out who had "trained in Syria" or was otherwise involved in "terrorism." Many Quillers will recognise this methodology from British colonial methods, including in the North, when, among others, Jean McConville was alleged to have been an "identifier." Peri was one of the Shin Bet leaders deeply affected by the murder of Yitzhak Rabin and dismayed at the subsequent failure of the Oslo peace accords.

Carmi Gillon handed in his resignation over the murder of Rabin, but it was rejected. Under his tenure, physical brutality – involving the physical shaking of detainees – increased and was codified as legal. One small man died under interrogation. As Gillon put it "died of shaken baby syndrome."

The two most interesting men to me were Ari Ayalon and Avraham Shalom. I'll discuss Shalom in the context of an incident, which became known as the "Bus 300 affair."

The Bus 300 Affair

On the 12th April 1984, four men, including at least two teenagers (Jamal Mahmoud Qabalan, Muhammad Baraka, Majdi Abu Jumaa, and Subhi Abu Jumaa), who were reportedly not members of any paramilitary group, hijacked a number 300 bus. The New York Times wrote that:

Some of the bus passengers described three of the hijackers as young. One hostage gave the ages as 16, 19 and 20 and remarked, 'They behaved very nicely, this I must say.' The leader was described as older and harder.

The report went on:

Hostages and officials said the hijackers wanted to cross into Egypt and release the passengers there in exchange for the release of 500 Palestinians held in Israeli prisons.

The army fired at the wheels of the bus, which sped to a halt. There was a standoff, in which one of the hijackers was killed, but two were brought off the bus unharmed. The army stormed the bus after identifying that the hijackers were "amateurs."

The condition of the two men brought off the bus is important. Here are photos of them:


Reports came out that all four hijackers had been killed in the assault to free the hostages. It was a lie. What had happened, according to Avraham Shalom was that "the army pounced on them … broke their bones … it was a lynching." Shalom arrived on the scene and asked what was going on. He was told that the two captured men had been badly beaten by the army. Shalom, the head of Shin Bet, a man with the highest political contacts in Israel, says in the documentary that he said "Hit them again and finish them." His men did as they were told, as Shalom put it they "smashed their heads in with a rock." Other reports state that it was an iron bar as well as rocks. Inquiries and a trial followed. Some were convicted. Shalom was ambivalent. Whilst he was steadfastly in support of a two-state solution for the conflict, he bluntly stated that he "didn't want to see terrorists in court." Other former heads of Shin Bet describe how people feared Shalom, and that he was a "bully." Nevertheless, he had to resign over his arbitrary death sentence.

Ari Ayalon, discussing the pardons of all those convicted of beating two defenceless teenagers to death, said that "the Prime Minister and the cabinet" failed.

Shin Bet and the Politics of Occupation

A total lack of trust in politicians, except for Rabin, is a constant theme amongst the leaders of Shin Bet, along with the need for a political settlement. Ayalon was dismayed at the illegal settlements, noting that the settlers were beginning to believe themselves as "the masters" and fearing their political and paramilitary power. Ayalon believes these fears were justified, citing the murder of Rabin as evidence.

Diskin is read a quote from an Israeli public intellectual, Yeshayahu Leibowitz:

A state ruling over a hostile population of one million foreigners will necessarily become a Shin Bet state, with all that this implies for education, freedom of speech and thought and democracy. The corruption found in every colonial regime will affix itself to the State of Israel. The administration will have to suppress an Arab uprising on one hand and acquire Quislings, or Arab traitors on the other.

Diskin simply replies that he "agrees with every word of it."


At a conference in London aimed at reducing conflict, during the second intifada, Ami Ayalon described being approached by the internationally renowned psychiatrist and human rights activist Eyad Al-Sarraj, who bluntly told Ayalon that, the Palestinians were victorious. Ayalon pointed out that they were losing hundreds, soon to be thousands of men, and that they were losing their "dream of statehood" asking "What kind of victory is that?" Al-Sarraj replied:

Ami, I don't understand you. You still don't understand us. For us, victory is seeing you suffer. That's all we want. The more we suffer, the more you'll suffer. Finally, after 50 years, we've reached a balance of power, a balance: your F-16 jet fighter versus our suicide bomber.

Ayalon said he suddenly understood the "suicide bomber phenomenon" and also " our reaction very differently:

How many operations did we launch because we hurt, because when they blow up buses it really hurts us and we want revenge? How often have we done that?

The final word can be left to the most vicious of the Shin Bet leaders, Shalom. Speaking more than a decade ago, he said Israel would have to "speak to everyone" and that for "Israel, it's too much of a luxury not to speak to everyone." He went on:

We are making the lives of millions of people unbearable … the future is bleak … we've become cruel … cruel to ourselves, but especially the occupied.

Sitting and waiting on the Israeli reaction to the Hamas rampage, it seems that nobody in the Israeli establishment listens to their most dedicated and professional killing outfit.

You can watch the film here. I hope that you do, and welcome your comments.

⏩ Brandon Sullivan is a middle aged, middle management, centre-left Belfast man. Would prefer people focused on the actual bad guys. 

The Gatekeepers 🔴 Inside Israel’s Internal Security Agency

Simon Smyth ðŸŽ¥ 41 years ago today as I write this, the Sabra and Shatila massacre of men, women and children started in the Palestinian refugee camps in Lebanon.


It lasted 3 days. I have watched this Israeli made film 4 or 5 times before. A powerful anti-war film bordering on traumatic.

Lebanese President Bashir Gemayel was killed sparking a massacre of thousands of Palestinian refugees by his Christian Phalangist followers. The Israelis wanted him to rule the fractured country so they were angry too.

A phone call is made to the Israeli Defence Minister Arik Sharon to warn him of the massacre, "Thank you for bringing it to my attention. Happy New Year," Sharon said before going back to sleep.

It is an animation style film. The film tells the story of a film maker (the director himself) speaking to a number of his old friends from the Israeli army. He is trying to piece together what happened during the War in Lebanon as he has no memory of it. This docudrama feels palpably real and is as close to his truth as we will get. The interviews, stories and the speakers themselves are real except for two participants whose appearance and voices are disguised.

I would recommend this film despite it being a heavy watch as I believe it is valuable education wise and is an excellent story. Despite or because of the horror there is much to be learned. Stories like this should spur efforts to halt the ethnic cleansing of Palestine and elsewhere.

I note how the film made two direct comparisons with Nazis and the Warsaw Ghetto. I would never make these comparisons myself, believing the ethnic cleansing of Palestine can stand on its own. The genocide of the Second World War and that of the Armenians in Turkey or the Belgian Congo are all different. I note it purely because the comparisons in this 2008 film would be censored or shouted down today.

Despite watching this film before and being fully aware that live footage was coming at the end, I was unprepared and couldn't stop crying.

There are many good films about the Palestinian plight and this one deserves our attention particularly if you shy away from an Israeli soldier's perspective.

⏩ Simon Smyth is an avid reader and collector of books.

Waltz With Bashir

Christopher Owens ðŸŽ¥ One of the notorious 'video nasties' of the 1980's (and used by The Daily Mail to spearhead its campaign of censorship), retrospective viewing shows that Cannibal Holocaust is a genuinely challenging film, not just in its criticisms of the media (all too prevalent in 2023) but also in terms of how far filmmakers are prepared to go. 
In spite of it being one of the nastiest films I've ever seen, it is a landmark in exploitation cinema and has proven far more influential than some would care to admit (the "found footage" horror genre owes its existence to this film) and it is still able to shock and horrify audiences over 40 years later.

🎥🎥🎥 

An American film crew disappear in the Amazon rainforest while filming a documentary about indigenous cannibal tribes. Harold Monroe, an NYU anthropologist, agrees to lead a rescue mission in hopes of finding the missing filmmakers (and, crucially, any footage that was shot). What he discovers shakes his outlook on the media and life itself.

🎥🎥🎥

Partially inspired by the media coverage of the Red Brigades (such as the murder of politician Aldo Moro), Ruggero Deodato's skilled and innovative direction paints the wildlife as a skin crawling place where anything could be lying behind those bushes waiting to attack you. In many ways, it feels just as much a reaction to the footage of American soldiers in Vietnam. Indeed, the whole film can be viewed as a critique of imperialism, and how excessive desires can lead to evil. As a result, this is very much a visceral film: more about impact rather than implications.

The biggest controversy surrounding the film remains, and rightfully so, the execution of animals on screen. Although the version available in the UK is missing one particularly sadistic scene of a coati (I vividly recall seeing the uncut version where the camera records the poor animal's real time reaction to being sliced open), the infamous turtle sequence will be more than enough to make people switch off. Indeed, the postmortem moment where its legs jerk around still creeps me out and the look of glee on the faces of those involved completely erases any vague sympathy held by the audience.

Although there's no denying that the animal violence is ultimately unnecessary, I do think the frisson of knowing they're real add an eerie, sadistic edge to the film's environment and its message. It revels in its sadism, and that's why it's so effective (for me personally). They're certainly deeply unpleasant, and the knowledge that they're all too real add to the creepy, nihilistic atmosphere around the film.

Noted independent filmmaker Lloyd Kaufman agrees, noting that “Pudovkin’s theory of editing held that if you took a shot of someone with a neutral expression (like the Mona Lisa, for example) and cut to a shot of a steak, the viewer would think the person looked hungry. If you took a shot of that same person and then juxtaposed it with a shot of a baby, the viewer would think they wore an expression of love. In Cannibal Holocaust, we see the actors kill and rip apart a giant sea turtle and other animals. Later on, they run across a woman impaled on a stake (the shot clearly demonstrating that the actress is sitting on a bicycle seat). The audience has already seen actual death on screen and have been subtly brainwashed into assuming they’re now seeing a woman with a stake rammed up her genitalia. The brain has been conditioned to accept that which it’s now seeing as real. This mixture of real and staged violence, combined with the handheld camerawork and the rough, unedited quality of the second half of the movie, is certainly enough to convince someone that what they are watching is real.”

Of course, it can certainly be argued that such techniques undermine the film’s commentary on the media. However, I think of the film in the context of Albert Schweitzer’s claim that ‘humanitarianism consists in never sacrificing a human being to a purpose.’ Cannibal Holocaust is a film where humanitarianism has completely died out, and all that is left are sadistic thugs hell bent on destruction without any thought as to why they want it, except for fame and fortune. Hence why they treat both humans and animals the same way.Definitely not for everyone, and even those with an open mind are advised to proceed with extreme caution.


⏩ Christopher Owens was a reviewer for Metal Ireland and finds time to study the history and inherent contradictions of Ireland. He is currently the TPQ Friday columnist.

Cannibal Holocaust

Christopher Owens ✒ Released in 1980, this British gangster flick was long thought of as being inferior to Get Carter due to the latter’s assimilation by Cool Britannia in the mid 90’s. 

Thankfully, The Long Good Friday is now (correctly) regarded as one of the finest movies ever made and is discussed as equally as Michael Caine’s 1971 masterpiece.

One can argue that, in keeping with the era, this adoption was more of an affectation than a sincere love of the material. People referenced Caine’s suit, his car, the soundtrack and the 60’s fashion but seemingly overlooked the character of Carter, the bleak surroundings and the grim violence.

By contrast, John McKenzie’s classic takes place in the immediate aftermath of the 1979 general election and is set in pre-gentrification London. There is nothing for hipsters to latch onto, and for those with mindsets that think beyond the cut of someone’s suit, there is much to treasure.

♜ ♞ ♟

Harold Shand (in a career best performance from Bob Hoskins) has run London from top to bottom for over a decade. With the new decade approaching, Shand has set up a deal with an American organisation (later revealed to be the Mafia) which will legitimise his corporation and further widen his influence.

However, on Good Friday, his men are killed and his business ventures are blown up. Is it a rival looking to sabotage the deal or is it someone beyond his worldview who won’t play by Shand’s rules?

♜ ♞ ♟

Noted for its prescient view of Thatcherite Britain (drawn from screenwriter Barry Keefe’s days as a journalist where he noticed dodgy dealings going on in the Docklands) as well as its (arguably) pro-IRA stance (which very nearly cost the film its distribution after the death of Mountbatten, only being saved by George Harrison’s Handmade Films), The Long Good Friday is a cinematic tour de force that is as tightly packed as a Swiss army knife.

Never lagging in pace and brimming with tension, the viewer is placed beside Harold as he tries to figure out who is attacking him, forever one step behind. As a result, we begin to feel a little sympathy for this bulldog trapped in a suit (as noted film critic Gene Siskel once described him) as his persona (stiff upper lip British bulldog bully) is sorely tested.

Helen Mirren also delivers as Victoria, Harold’s wife. Fiercely loyal and just as much a partner in Harold’s dealings, she fights her corner with controlled, ice cool temperament and even directs Harold when he’s lost control. Combined with explosive performances from Derek Thompson and P.H. Moriarty, you can never tear your eyes away from the screen. Especially when you’re hearing dialogue like:

"Nothing unusual," he says! Eric's been blown to smithereens, Colin's been carved up, and I've got a bomb in me casino, and you say nothing unusual?

“Don't you ever tell me what I can or can't do! Bent law can be tolerated for as long as they're lubricating, but you have become definitely parched. If I was you, I'd run for cover and close the hatch, 'cause you're gonna wind up on one of those meat hooks, my son.”

“What I'm looking for is someone who can contribute to what England has given to the world: culture, sophistication, genius. A little bit more than an 'ot dog, know what I mean?”

And as for the wordless ending? Wow.

Arguably, the only aspect that has not aged well is the soundtrack and this is mainly down to the use of the saxophone. Because of its use throughout the 1980’s in horrible pop music (‘Hungry Eyes’, ‘Careless Whisper’, ‘Never Tear Us Apart’), the instrument has become a byword for cheese. However, leaving that aside, the mix of synth arpeggios and orchestra does compliment the drama onscreen and adds an almost Shakespearian like tragedy in certain scenes. It’s just that, compared to the timeless cool, groove and immediacy of Get Carter, Francis Monkman’s score definitely falls short.

In recent years, the influence of the film has been felt in various British gangster films (specifically Guy Ritchie ones) and the foresight has been applauded in various upmarket publications. None of that would matter if the film wasn’t a dynamic thriller that left you breathless on first viewing.

A masterpiece.


⏩ Christopher Owens was a reviewer for Metal Ireland and finds time to study the history and inherent contradictions of Ireland. He is currently the TPQ Friday columnist.

The Long Good Friday

Brandon Sullivan ✍ Since becoming a parent, there are some things I do a lot less of (reading, writing, socialising, sleeping) and some things I do a lot more of, which I hadn’t previously. 

 One of these is listen to podcasts. A young colleague of mine recommended The Rest is Politics, part of Goalhanger Podcasts which I was surprised to learn was owned by Gary Lineker. Another recommendation was Goalhanger’s We Have Ways of Making You Talk, a WW2 podcast, and it was from these two that I ventured into The Rest is History (TRIH).

TRIH did a two part podcast on J. Robert Oppenheimer, and I found it riveting. It drew heavily from a book titled American Prometheus: The Triumph and Tragedy of J. Robert Oppenheimer written by Kai Bird and Martin J. Sherwin. The podcast mentioned the film, and I was very keen to see it, particularly as I knew it was unlikely that I would get round to reading the book, and the audiobook weighed in at 26 hours.

I’ve seen three of Nolan’s previous films, Dunkirk, Memento, and Intersteller, and would probably rate then in that order. Dunkirk was masterful, wonderful use of sound, and clearly the work of an auteur. I went into the cinema with high expectations. I wasn’t disappointed, but I wasn’t immediately blown away either. It is, however, undeniably a good film, with stunning visuals, fascinating use of sound, and silence, good performances. But I don’t think it quite captured the depths and/or heights of Oppenheimer’s complexity. The film included a episode in which Oppenheimer attempted to poison one of his professors, but left out other occasions of violent acting out. The film was strong on his exceptionalism, but a little weaker on that which made him something of an outcast at various points in his life.

The first part of the podcast was called The Father of the Atomic Bomb, and the second part was titled The Witch Hunt. The film was strongest on Oppenheimer finding his metier as programme director of the Manhattan Project. But it was weaker on what followed, when Oppenheimer was persecuted by paranoid “reds-under-the-bed” politicians and jealous academics. Nolan did skilfully set the scene of Oppenheimer’s adjacency to communism, but didn’t do as well in the pseudo-courtroom drama that dogged his later life.

The film lasts for three hours, and the scenes that I felt were weakest came in the final 30 to 40 minutes. All that being said, though, I plan to go back to the cinema to watch it again, which I think is great cinema does. At the moment I’d give it a solid 7/10. Perhaps with a rewatch, that will increase.

I’m reading a book at the moment called Made Men: The Story of Goodfellas, by Glenn Kenny. Kenny interviewed Scorsese in 1989 for a magazine dedicated to home video called Video Review. Scorsese applauded the VHS revolution, saying that it was a good thing for people to be able to build up a library of films. But he also said that he worried about “the shorter attention span encouraged by television and video.” Well, we do have Tik-Tok, YouTube, Tweets, three word political slogans and what does feel like a dumbing down of culture. But we also have brilliant longform and in-depth podcasts, journalists like Patrick Radden Keefe, and of course films lasting for up to three hours by Christopher Nolan and others.

And Oppenheimer is definitely worth three hours of your time to watch.

I’d love to hear from anyone who has read American Prometheus, or is interested in discussing Oppenheimer, the Manhattan Project, the morality of the bomb and the bombings and so on.

⏩ Brandon Sullivan is a middle aged, middle management, centre-left Belfast man. Would prefer people focused on the actual bad guys. 

Oppenheimer

Henry Joy 🎥 For those of you who enjoy suspense movies here’s a recommendation.

‘The Beasts’ is a movie about fear and resentment, and about Brexit-style nationalist hatreds that exist in a not-exactly-united European Union.

Official Short Trailer.


It is a fierce, bitter tale with a flinty sharpness: partly a social-realist drama of class and xenophobia, and partly a rural noir horror, a Euro-arthouse twist on Straw Dogs or Deliverance. It’s inspired by the true story from 2010 of a middle-class hippy idealist Dutch couple who attempted to settle in the Spanish village of Santoalla in Galicia’s remote “wild west” and fell out badly with their neighbours over their gentrification plans: a row that escalated into a nightmare. It has in fact already been the subject of a documentary, Andrew Becker and Daniel Mehrer’s Santoalla, and has now been fictionalised by film-maker Rodrigo Sorogoyen. As the story begins, the newcomers have already infuriated the locals irretrievably by vetoing a communal plan to sell out to a wind-turbine company. It was a one-off chance for easy money that local people wanted to grab, tiring of a lifetime of farming toil and angered by these high-handed foreigners airily telling them they’ve been doing it wrong.*
This movie repulsed me by times and had me crying at others, powerful cinematography (I watched it on the big screen), with stellar acting performances. 

Highly recommended.

* Abridged from a review in the Guardian.

⏩ Henry Joy is a patron of TPQ.

The Beasts

Brandon Sullivan ðŸŽ¥ has been to a film directed by Darron Aronofsky.

I’m not sure if it’s still the case, but in the 1990s, “Joe jobs” often came with benefits, official or not. My then girlfriend worked at Blockbuster, and so I watched a multitude of films I would otherwise probably not have, and at an age (late teens) where the brain tends to record impressions more solidly than later in life. 

So it was that I watched Gods & Monsters, a partly fictional dramatization of the life of the ironically named James Whale. Gods & Monsters featured Brendon Fraser in a starring role, and I remember being impressed by the film. Last year (September) I was on holiday and the AirBnB I was staying at had a stack of DVDs and a player. There were some 90s classics: Three Kings stood the test of time; I felt Gods & Monsters had not.

Someone once described another of Aronofsky’s films, Requiem for a Dream as “the best film I’ll never watch again” which is thought captured the quality and impact of that particular film. The Wrestler was different: not exactly a light film, but more traditional in scope and cinematic format. Requiem for a Dream felt like being on a troubling acid trip; The Wrestler was like a more interesting Rocky (no offence to Rocky – it’s a fine film). The Whale was more Requiem, less Wrestler. I would really like Quillers to go and see this film, so have chosen not to give much of the plot away in this review.

The first scene was shot from a distance, and I was wondering what I was looking at, and felt it had some pedestrian The Shining vibes. Still trying to catch up with what I had seen, and the viewer is then presented with an exceptionally overweight Brendan Fraser’s character, Charlie, masturbating to gay porn, in an apartment that is densely detailed and all the more depressing for it. I found the pace of the film a strength: days are announced as the impending morbidity of Charlie is discussed.

Charlie is clearly intelligent, and talented as his profession: teaching English literature to an online class. Like Ben Sanderson in Leaving Las Vegas, Charlie knows that his excess is going to kill him, and like Ben, seems committed to this outcome, regardless of who is hurt and who is left behind. In Charlie’s case, there is more collateral damage, and not even the faded, dirty glamour of Las Vegas to deflect from the grimness of the decision not to intervene to prolong life.

Charlie can be likeable, even when his choices and actions are selfish, even despicable. He’s sentimental, self-indulgent on a number of levels, and apologetic to others so often and in such a way that it becomes irritating and nonsensical. This, I felt, was Aronofsky not letting the audience away with simply pitying or liking Charlie. There’s so much more going on. Charlie demands of those around him, and by extension the audience: what do they think of him? Are they disgusted? I was left wondering when Charlie’s decision not to save his life began – and where, perhaps, choice became impossible.

I thought I had untangled one of the threads of the plot, but had got it wrong. I found this a film that keeps you thinking and on your toes. All of the characters are fully dimensional, interesting and textured. None are heroes, and none are really villains. Religion and literature, and the possible redemptive qualities of each are present, alongside self-destruction, hope, and fear.

I found this a powerful film, and one that has stayed with me since I watched it. I have read a number of reviews: 2/5 stars from The Evening Standard, and 1.5/4 stars from Roger Ebert’s site. I’d give it a solid 8/10, and unlike Requiem for a Dream, might watch it again to see if I missed anything.

For some reason, it made me think of this song, My Pal, by GOD. A bunch of Australian teens, who made this incredible song, and then, from what I’ve read, sank into heroin use from which some of them didn’t survive. Death is often adjacent to the finest art.
 
I hope you go to see it as well.

⏩ Brandon Sullivan is a middle aged, middle management, centre-left Belfast man. Would prefer people focused on the actual bad guys. 

The Whale

Alfie Gallagher 🎥Terrence Malick’s Days of Heaven is a painterly web of ironies. 


The title itself contrasts with the arduous and uncertain lives of the migrant workers that the film portrays. Its sounds and images are extraordinarily delicate and lyrical, yet at the same time, they depict a world of poverty, inequity, violence and deceit. The wheat fields on which the drama plays out might seem like a paradise, but the characters find themselves very far from heaven.

The simplicity of the plot belies the film’s deep ambiguity. Set in 1916, it tells the story of Bill (Richard Gere) and Abby (Brooke Adams), a young couple on the run from the law with Bill’s younger sister Linda (Linda Manz), as they hobo to Texas and find temporary work harvesting crops for a wealthy yet sickly farmer (Sam Shepard). Ground down by the remorseless labour in the fields, Bill attempts to grift the farmer by pressuring Abby into a false romance with him.

There is a stillness to the cinematography and a detachment to Malick’s style which does not admit easy moral judgments. The farmer is good-natured yet he has become extremely wealthy simply by owning the land on which others must slog; Bill exploits Abby yet he does so as much out of despair as out of avarice. A particularly bitter irony is Bill’s attempt to persuade her to marry the farmer – “I hate seeing you stooped over out there. Men looking at your ass like you’re a whore.” On this question – whether treachery in the bedroom is preferable to toil in the fields – the film remains as ambivalent as the twilight in which so much of it is set.

Days of Heaven may be interpreted as a meditation on inequality, how it degrades and dehumanises. It may also be appreciated simply as a gorgeous work of art whose scenes are like Impressionist paintings made dreamlike by the elegance of Ennio Morricone’s score. Indeed, the film rewards repeat viewings, for rarely have the factories and fields of America been so beguiling and so beautiful.

⏭ Alfie Gallagher is a Sligo based blogger who can be found @ Left From The West.

Days Of Heaven (1978)

Christopher Owens ðŸŽ¥ For a man who (allegedly) once told a Royal Navy recruitment officer that he would love to burgle houses for the Royal Navy (as the position he was applying for was as a bugler), Martin Cahill did extremely well in life.

His execution at the hands of (*insert whoever*) in August 1994 merely solidified the legend of The General: rising from the Hollyfield flats in Rathmines, Dublin to become one of the most notorious crime bosses in Irish history via a string of robberies, bombings and stunts designed to embarrass the Gardai. Coupled with his seemingly larger than life persona and a state seemingly unable to do anything about him, it’s a potent combination for storytellers.

Ironically, he also serves as a reminder of a more “innocent” time in Irish criminal history. One without feuds, stabbings and extreme violence. Certainly not on the level there is today. A lot of this is down to the fact that most of the original gangsters that dominated Dublin in the 1980’s (Cahill, Dunne, Mitchell, Cunningham, Gilligan etc) knew each other from local estates, industrial school etc and so, if an issue arose, they could mediate as a feud would be bad for business. Unthinkable in 2022.

Broadcast in February 1999 (not long after the murder of Eamon Collins), Vicious Circle is a lesser seen take on Cahill’s life and crimes. Despite it not having the scope of John Boorman’s masterpiece The General (released the previous year) or the star power of Kevin Spacey and Colin Farrell’s appalling Ordinary Decent Criminal (dumped in cinemas the next year), as well as it being a TV movie, it stands up pretty damn well.

A lot of this is down to the atmosphere conjured up by the camerawork. Capturing parts of Dublin yet to be touched by the Celtic Tiger, the landscape is dirty and post-industrial. Decaying warehouses, cramped offices and a dreary landscape (even in the countryside) add to the grittiness of the film.

Likewise, the performances are more restrained in comparison to the two feature length films. Ken Stott (Shallow Grave ðŸ“¹ The Hobbit) downplays Cahill’s extravagance and renders him a more mundane type, but always with a hint of violence under the surface. Andrew Connolly (Patriot Games📹  Lost ðŸ“¹ Heroes) depicts the character of Declan Finney as a world-weary detective whose decaying personal life means that he uses his pursuit of Cahill as a way to vent his anger. John Kavanagh (Cal ðŸ“¹ Braveheart ðŸ“¹ Some Mother’s Son) has been playing IRA men in films for years, so he knows the score and delivers a performance of quiet confidence and restrained menace as Charlie Rice.

Although Cahill is the lynchpin, the film gives enough focus to both Finney and Rice, with their characters’ relationships to Cahill highlighting the amoral nature of Cahill in that he has contempt for the law (Finney) and political groups (Rice). Both are determined to sort him out, but what does that do to someone like Finney who’s supposed to be upholding the law?

The only downside is that the plot tries too hard to compact 11 years into 100 minutes and, as a result, plot strands have to be invented to make the story concise. While it works for the most part, there are one or two moments that would have needed another run through Microsoft Word.

For example, it is heavily implied that the character of Barry (who serves as Cahill’s right-hand man) gave the IRA a stash of gold bars from the O’Connor’s heist seen at the start of the film, with the end result of this being the infamous crucifixion (which made Cahill notorious throughout the underworld and belied his jovial veneer) of a member of the gang. However, it’s never explained how a car supposedly stashed with hidden gold bars could be emptied without Cahill (a meticulous planner) spotting this.

Likewise, another moment sees Declan Finney talk to an RTE journalist about the capture of two UVF members holding a Beit painting in Istanbul. It’s never made clear what the issue is with him talking to her, but there’s a vague implication that this is Finney putting pressure on Cahill that will lead to his death. It’s an angle dealt with too ambivalently for the audience’s satisfaction.

Maybe not the most historically accurate tale but, for a glimpse into a bleak and unforgiving world, Vicious Circle has plenty to offer.


⏩ Christopher Owens was a reviewer for Metal Ireland and finds time to study the history and inherent contradictions of Ireland. He is currently the TPQ Friday columnist.

Vicious Circle

Dixie Elliot ðŸŽ¥ Two hours, which I'll never get back, was spent watching the massively overhyped film, The Northman.

The Northman - Bing images

With a cast of leading Hollywood actors the last thing you'd expect was acting which was as wooden as the longships. 

You notice this from the very beginning of the film when Ethan Hawke arrives back home from the wars. The exchange between himself, his wife, Nicole Kidman, and his son was something you'd expect to find in amateur dramatics or worse still, a school play.

For the short time that he was in the film, Ethan Hawke acted like a Viking who couldn't wait to catch the early flight to Valhalla.

About 90% of the film's locations were shot in the North of Ireland, although it was set in Iceland. The accents actually sounded more Belfast than Norwegian.

Torr Head in County Antrim was used for the impressive set of a Viking town, while the River Bann was used as a river in Rus (Russia). Gleniff Horseshoe, County Sligo, was also a location and an Icelandic volcano was added to the Irish countryside with the use of CGI.

As for the storyline itself, it was the usual tale of revenge only the Vikings, friend and foe alike, all seemed to be out of their heads on hallucinogenic drugs throughout the entire film. It was more Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds, than a Viking saga.

The TV series, Vikings is better, by far, than this film. In fact, if you want to save the two hours then watch the trailer instead as all the best bits are in that . . .  


The Northman

Brandon Sullivan ðŸŽ¥ I chanced upon a random article in Edinburgh Live which talked about the cast of Looking After Jo Jo, a seminal BBC series which looks at the criminal underworld of Edinburgh and its movement into heroin dealing. The comparisons with Trainspotting are inevitable, but it has more in common with Alive and Kicking, the underrated, often overlooked, drama starring Lenny Henry as a heroin dealer in England, which is loosely based on Calton Athletic.

I was young when I watched Alive and Kicking, and still remember the dissonance of seeing light entertainment maestro Lenny Henry as a “baddie.” Looking after Jo Jo aired in February 1998, and I have the vaguest of memories of seeing it first time round.

Looking After Jo Jo is set in early 1980s Edinburgh, and was filmed in mid/late 1990s Edinburgh. Unlike Trainspotting, it is filmed in the city the story was set in. Tory decline and neglect is evident in many of the scenes. The housing “schemes” are utterly desperate. David Scott Graham’s incredible documentary Little Criminals vividly captured the Glaswegian heroin dystopia of the 1990s. The copy of Looking After Jo Jo that I managed to find is ripped from a VHS copy, and the graininess of the picture adds to the sense of time and gritty place. For those wanting to see some vintage footage of 1980s Edinburgh with and through the eyes of heroin using artists, Opus Morphia is a hallucinogenic and rather haunting 20 minute film.

It’s hard to imagine now, but Edinburgh in the 1980s was in the midst of an unprecedented heroin and AIDs epidemic. Addiction and drug related crime added to a social malaise exacerbated by deindustrialisation. Trainspotting (the book) captured a moment in time, and whilst the film was good, it did not (and to be fair, probably could not have) capture the numerous evocate themes of the novel. This is not wealthy, cosmopolitan contemporary Edinburgh, rich in culture, finance jobs, and a tourist magnet. The “jigsaw flats” – immortalised in Trainspotting’s chapter “Winter in West Granton” are now a thing of the past, along with other chronically bad housing developments. But during the Looking After Jo Jo era, terrible housing was the unfortunate vista to the public health emergency, and social catastrophe, of heroin addiction and AIDs.

Central to the plot of Looking after Jo Jo is the acquisition by criminals of pharmaceutical heroin from a factory in Edinburgh. This is based in fact, and also appears in Irvine Welsh’s Skagboys (to my mind, the second best book that he read – and there’s a considerable drop in quality after this novel and Trainspotting). In 1987, £1m worth of pharmaceutical heroin was stolen from Edinburgh Airport.

The RUC appear, fleetingly, in Looking After Jo Jo – one of their officers stays at the then North British (now Balmoral) luxury hotel, and has his Smith & Wesson revolver stolen. A story was related to me about two PSNI officers investigating Danny McColgan’s murder meeting with a journalist in Edinburgh, during breakfast at the hotel. The officers, one can guess they were former RUC, decided to have some Guinness with their breakfast.

The soundtrack is superb, and one might never hear Ultravox’s Vienna the same again. Some of the plot is muddled – family dynamics and mystery added to a social realism drama made for a clumsy timeline, but this is a mild criticism. Kevin McKidd’s character, Basil, seems out of place and rather annoying to begin with. Later, McKidd appears far more adept and skilled an actor when he takes off his sunglasses and is allowed to cease playing an overt moron. At times the wardrobe department appear to have been inspired by Miami Vice, but perhaps it was like that in the 1980s.

The heroin/AIDs era of the 1980s has its myths and mythology. A mysterious American man, influential and charismatic, and possibly the first to be afflicted with HIV, who demonstrated how to cook up and shoot up heroin. Dealers from Muirhouse and Leith who went onto make fortunes, some of them plying their trade in Aberdeen, where a duo of Muirhouse dealers would end up convicted of the manslaughter of two Aberdonians in one night, in separate incidents. The Edinburgh men seemingly having forgotten just how powerful their wares could be.

The closing titles of Looking After Jo Jo features a billboard of Thatcher, promoting the Tory cause, with two youths jumping up and down on a burnt out car, in slow motion. The people behind the production had their politics, but also the skill to keep them in the background of a credible and enjoyable drama.

If you can get a copy, watch it.

⏩ Brandon Sullivan is a middle aged, middle management, centre-left Belfast man. Would prefer people focused on the actual bad guys. 

Looking After Jo Jo ✑ Heroin, Decay And Decline In 1980’s Edinburgh

Christopher Owens ðŸŽ¥ has been to the movies.  


Britain in the 1980’s continues to be fertile ground for filmmakers.

And for obvious reason. Tethering on the edge of chaos, it was the sight of so many social changes that still impact on daily life in 2021.

Set during the video nasties era, Censor is the story of Enid Baines. Working for the British Board of Film Classification, she takes on the job of viewing films with the eye of a censor with diligence and a stiff upper lip. Not a universally popular figure in the BBFC - the phrase ‘Little Miss Perfect’ is mentioned a few times - her world begins to rupture professionally and personally. (It is alleged by the tabloids that a vicious murderer was inspired by a film passed by her). Her parents have her missing sister declared dead. I don’t want to go any further with plot elements as this is the sort of film that works best with little to no preconceptions. But you should get the gist from above.

The great Alan Moore once said that, if you were going to put on a cape and fight crime in real life, it would be for all sorts of complex and unpleasant reasons. Prano Bailey-Bond, in her directorial debut, takes this thinking and applies it to moral crusaders through the character of Enid: self-righteous, unlikeable and harbouring a dark secret.

Credit must go to Niamh Algar for fleshing out the character with a performance that suggests a soul out of sync with the world and with a hint of high-functioning autism. Through this, Enid is rescued from being a two-dimensional, Mary Whitehouse style windbag and into something much more ambiguous.

Visually, the film is a treat. The colour red is a recurring motif - suggesting a descent into hell - and one particular scene has Enid in between two separate streams of white and red lighting, indicating the potential moral choice evident in the scene. Similarly, London is depicted as a dark, damp hellhole. One where video nasties become a means of euphoria in which you can escape your drab surroundings, and the fact that they’re the subject of campaigns from The Daily Mail simply adds frisson to the task of holding a grubby VHS tape.

For fans of the video nasties, and horror fans in general, there are plenty of references to the likes of The Evil Dead (Enid’s notes at the beginning of the film are uncannily similar to the actual BBFC report on the 1982 classic), Videodrome ðŸ“¹ Poltergeist ðŸ“¹ The Hills Have Eyes and the various ‘Don’t Go in…’ films that were a staple of the genre. Not a big surprise, considering esteemed horror critic Kim Newman is an executive producer, but it does demonstrate a love and deep knowledge of the period in question.

Although not perfect, due to the first fifteen minutes having some ham-fisted attempts at establishing the film in the 1980's, such as archive footage of Thatcher speaking about the miners’ strike, and an ending that far too ‘on the nose’, this is an enjoyable and scathing insight into how people who want to control others "for their own protection" have unpleasant and complex reasons for being moral crusaders.

Something that rings all too true in this era of cancel culture.

⏩ Christopher Owens was a reviewer for Metal Ireland and finds time to study the history and inherent contradictions of Ireland. He is currently the TPQ Friday columnist.  

Censor

Alex McCrory - having watched Valkyrie a few times, shares his thoughts.

Operation Valkyrie was a contingency plan designed to ensure the continuity of government in the event of widespread civil disorder in major German cities. In any crisis the Reserve Army would take control of all government buildings and impose military rule.

By 1944 opposition to Hitler’s management of the war effort was growing within sections of the army and civil administration. A small group of senior army officers and regional administrators had formed a clandestine group to remove the Fuhrer from power before Germany collapsed altogether. They hoped with the dictator gone, they could sue for an honourable peace with the Allies.
 
Treating themselves as the official resistance, the conspirators believed they stood the best chance of getting rid of Hitler because of their positions in the German army. A cursory glance at the names of those involved in the conspiracy reveals this was no flight of fancy.

• Ludwig Beck, Chief of the General Staff before Wirld War II.
• Major General Henning von Tresckow, said by the Gestapo to be the “evil mind” behind the coup attempt.
• Lieutenant General Friedrich Olbricht, a senior general staff officer.
• Claus von Stauffenberg, a highly decorated young officer who was seriously wounded in Africa.
• Last but not least was Hitler’s personal favourite, Field Marshal Erwin Rommel.
 
They were joined by several regional administrators and two other Germans prominent in public life,  a former senior Nazi administrator Karl Goerdeler and the theologian Dietrich Bonhoeffer.

All of these men knew the risks involved in their joint enterprise. Failure would have meant certain death and ignominy. All were social conservatives and nationalist by sentiment, but they shared one burning desire, that was to see the end of Hitler and the Nazi Party.

Their first attempt to kill the dictator occurred in March 1944 when he was visiting troops on the Eastern front. Tresckow planned to blow up Hitler’s plane in mid-air with a bomb concealed in a wooden box which contained a bottle of Cointreau. Unfortunately, the bomb failed to explode and Tresckow had to risk retrieving it so as not to give away the plotters.

A few months later in June another more determined attempt was made that involved one of the conspirators, Claus von Stauffenberg, actually placing a bomb in the Wolf’s Lair, Hitler’s most secure wartime bunker, during a meeting with his top generals. Confirmation of the Fuhrer’s death was a thought a necessary precondition for the implementation of Operation Valkyrie, otherwise, it would not succeed.

Some of the plotters were aware of the existence of the contingency plan and thought it could be used to their advantage. In an ingenious twist Valkyrie would be deployed to eliminate the SS threat immediately after Hitler’s death. The was no scope for dithering or procrastination as the future of Germany was at stake.
 
Enter Murphy’s Law.

The story is dramatically presented on the big screen in an entertaining film starring Tom Cruise. I am not a big Cruise fan but, on this occasion, he is supported by a fantastic cast of actors.
 
Finally, there was no less than fifteen attempts on Hitler’s life made by political opponents of every stripe. Had just one been successful then the course of history could have been different for tens of millions.

I read somewhere that the Nazi Party ruled by fear. Fear was ever present in Hitler’s Germany, and it was reinforced by the regime’s barbaric treatment of ethnic minorities and political opponents alike.

Alec McCrory 
is a former blanketman.

Valkyrie

Christopher Owens 🎥 Released in 1960, pre-Beatles and Rolling Stones, this time capsule is a lot more entertaining and important than you may think.


Jennifer Linden (mesmerisingly played by Gillian Hills in her debut role) is the sarky teenage daughter of Paul Linden, a respectable businessman who plans to rebuild London into a series of tower blocks where the individual can be left alone (a Ballardian nightmare if ever there was one). His new wife, Nichole, has a past she’d prefer not to reveal. But Jennifer, whose love of bebop and rock n roll puts her at odds with her father, soon finds herself in a world of striptease and sleazy businessmen (memorably played by Christopher Lee) as she uncovers Nichole’s secret past.

Ostentatiously an exploitation film dealing with the parental fears of the time (juvenile delinquency, the influence of American culture on British youth, a generation gap between parents who had fought in WWII and the children who only knew the aftermath), retrospective viewing reveals a film that is not only deliciously fun, but also deals with themes of class, the thin veneer of respectability and disaffected youth in a way that is still poignant in 2021.

None of this would be possible without Hill's performance. A cross between Jim Stark and Veda Pierce (with a dead eyed stare that Malcom McDowell would use to great effect in A Clockwork Orange), she is the archetypal post war teenager that so scandalised Britain in the late 50’s. She rejects the material comforts of her world due to teenage nihilism (“Next week - boom! - the world goes up in smoke. And what's the score? Zero”), sees rock n’ roll as the new reason for existing (“You've got to live for the kicks. It's all you've got”) and laughs at the normal conventions of society (“Love? That's the gimmick that makes sex respectable, isn't it”) all the while being tougher than the boys (witness her playing ‘chicken’ at the rail tracks) and reveling in her youth (her stepmother is dismissed as being ancient as she’s 24) and beauty.

The generation gap is evident in one particular scene where Jennifer and her friends head into a cave for some rock n roll. Soon, they end up discussing their parents and the war. One particular character, Tony, seems to have something weighing heavily on his shoulders when he lets out that his mother was killed in the Blitz, leading to this burst of teenage angst:

Look, whatever you want to do, it’s always ‘you’re too young son.’ You want to neck in the park? Oh, go home son. HOME? With the General and his whiskey and his ‘so, those were the days’? Who wants to neck at home? Gives me the screaming ad dabs…

What we see here is the post-war teenagers struggling to latch onto something that is their own. Laden with parents just grateful to have survived, they saw post-war life and the New Towns (like Crawley and Basildon) as proof that the good times were here (and the sort of place Jennifer’s dad would like to turn London into). However, disaffected teens saw this world as (according to Mark Lilla):

...an air-conditioned nightmare in which men commuted to work (and drank too much), women puttered around the house (and popped pills) ... children in cowboy hats pretended to murder one another (transferring their hatred of their parents onto their playmates).

With the sounds of Chuck Berry, Little Richard, Gene Vincent and Bill Haley making their way across the Atlantic, is it any wonder these kids latched onto it for dear life?

Notably, the film is the debut score for John Barry, who would go on to become one of the most celebrated film composers ever, with his most notable works soundtracking the James Bond franchise. Having worked with Adam Faith (who appears in the film as one of Jennifer’s friends), Barry’s soundtrack is what you’d expect from that era and it still makes you groove like a hip cat today.

Recent years have seen the film reappraised, with many noting that while the plot is rather threadbare and the dénouement is rather haphazard (although I would argue it’s in line with the ending to The Graduate), the daring dialogue, lesbian undertones (which played a part in the film’s initial trouble with the BBFC) and energetic vibe adds up to make a cult British film.

Highly recommended.

     

 
⏩ Christopher Owens was a reviewer for Metal Ireland and finds time to study the history and inherent contradictions of Ireland. He is currently the TPQ Friday columnist. 


Beat Girl

Alex McCrory 🎥 shares his thoughts on The Man With The Iron Heart.


Recently, I watched a fantastic film about the assassination of Reinhard Heydrich, considered by some as the natural successor to Hitler. 

The attack was planned by Britain's Special Operations Executive, and was carried out by 3 British trained Czech parachutists, Josef Gabcik, Jan Kubis and Josef Vakick, with the active assistance of the Czech resistance.

Reinhard Heydrich was a complex individual as portrayed in the film. He was cultured and an accomplished musician. His wife was a major influence on his decision to join the Nazis. She was almost as ruthless as he was in her single minded determination to succeed. They had two children which they loved to parade before Nazi officials. The difference between the treatment of their own children and the inhumanity shown to so many others is almost inexplicable. It can only be possible whenever the other is viewed in a completely different light: as being less than human.
 
Hydrich had a lucky break whenever he met SS-Reichführer Heinrich Himmler. He wanted to establish a new security department tasked with rooting out spies and traitors. What he saw in Heydrich convinced him of the young man's suitability for the job. Heydrich possessed unlimited ambition and an abundance of self-confidence. This meeting began a meteoric rise to the heights of Nazi officialdom.
 
Reinhard Heydrich was head of the murderous Einsatzgruppen, ideological soldiers picked for their resemblance to the Aryan stereotype. These detachments operated in the newly occupied territories where they rounded up tens of thousands of Jews and Communists for deportation and extermination.

There are stomach churning scenes of mass executions of men, women and children, their bodies dumped in pits covered with lime to speed decomposition. I have often wondered how millions walked to their deaths without protest or resistance. I can only conclude the fear and resignation was literally paralysing.
 
Such was the magnitude of the genocide that the German High Command cynically complained about the demoralising effect close-up executions was having on it's soldiers, and the shortage of bullets. A more economic method for getting rid of European Jewry would have to be found, and soon. Himmler had just the man for the job.

In 1941 Reinhard Heydrich became Deputy Reich-Protector of Bavaria and Moravia, including Czechoslovakia. He rule with an iron fist and was greatly feared by the people. But not all were cowed. In every occupied territory resistance was organised by those brave enough to take the risk. One of the most inspiring examples of resistance to the Nazis was the Warsaw Ghetto uprising. There a cohort of young Jews decided to fight rather than go defeated to the gas chambers.

I think this explains why I loved reading Mila 18 by American author Leon Uris. For me, the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising redeemed the Jews during their darkest period.
 
In January 1942, only six months before he was assassinated, Heydrich was tasked with finding a Final Solution to the Jewish Question. Toward this end he convened the Wannsee Conference just outside Berlin attended by top German officials, senior SS officers, and Nazi collaborators like Hans Frank. A bigger bunch of genocidaires you could not find anywhere. At this diabolical meeting Heydrich outlined the policy of mass extermination and ordered it's immediate implementation across all Europe.
The Final Solution was a Nazi euphemism for genocide.
 
The Czech resistance was led by three individuals codenamed The Three Kings. Heydrich knew of their existence and desperately wanted to cut the three heads off the resistance Hydra. The three young parachutists that were dropped behind enemy lines made contact with the resistance movement. In the beginning they did not know what their mission was in case of capture. After a short period of acclimatisation, they received their order to kill Reinhard Heydrich. Once they shared this information with the resistance there was widespread alarm. Some wanted to abort the operation because the consequences would be too great for the Czech people. Reprisals would be swift and harsh.
 
The assassination of Reinhard Heydrich has been well rehearsed in both book and in film. I have no need to cover it here. Suffice to say that he died from a combination of shock and blood poisoning caused by shrapnel or a piece of the car upholstery. Unfortunately, the resistance fighters also died inside a church where they were holed up, betrayed by a friend.

The scene of Heydrich dying in his wife's presence utterly failed to move me. I felt no sympathy for either one of them. She was complicit in all of his horrendous crimes for self-advancement. Also by his side was Heinrich Himmler, perhaps even a bigger war criminal by the time it all ended. If the truth be told, I found myself wishing him a speedy journey straight to hell.

Alec McCrory 
is a former blanketman.

The Man With The Iron Heart

Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)