tv The Film Review BBC News January 21, 2018 11:45pm-12:00am GMT
about wm hr in westminster very upset about big then, the fact it is being refurbished and not act to its former glory for many years. covered in scaffolding, it is resurrected now and then and some saying that when we leave the eu it should be bonging. passports and again seemed to be the big symbols of brexit. bonging. passports and again seemed to be the big symbols of brexitli am all in favour. these totemic images of britain, as you were saying, david liddington, the cabinet minister is not saying it won't happen, he is saying there are presently no arrangements for it. it seems to be a way of the telegraph bouncing the government into saying that it definitely will bong. bouncing the government into saying that it definitely will bongli shall raise a glass to you.” that it definitely will bongli shall raise a glass to you. i think what we are seeing here is the start ofa campaign, what we are seeing here is the start of a campaign, maybe. will you launch a petition to get this going? i must tweet for this, big ben bongs
for brexit. and stamps. we had stamps when we joined in 1974 and as isaid stamps when we joined in 1974 and as i said earlier, i possess a set of these stamps, a first day cover. i think we should have stamps. i am using this opportunity to say to the royal mail, get your stamps out. sta m ps royal mail, get your stamps out. stamps and big ben. stamps and bongs. thank you so much. that is it for the papers tonight. you can see the front pages online and on the bbc website. if you miss the programme any evening you can watch it later on bbc iplayer. thank you ben and ruth. goodbye. a warm welcome to the film
review on bbc news. to take us through this week's cinema releases is mark kermode. what have you been watching this week? very exciting week. we have the post, starring tom hanks and meryl streep. coco, the new animation from pixar. and the commuter, the new liam neeson action vehicle. and the post, it's aboutjournalism. i can't wait, i'm excited. did you like it? to the i did, i really did, it's a spielberg movie, it's a newsroom thriller
about the revelations of the pentagon papers, a report which basically said that successive us administrations had misled the country about the vietnam war. the film is largely set in 1971. tom hanks is ben bradley, the editor of the washington post. he is eagerfor a scoop. meryl streep is katherine ‘kay‘ graham, the publisher and proprieter of the washington post. it's going to the stock exchange, so its finances are slightly precarious. after the white house gets an injunction on the new york times, after they publish some of the pentagon papers, ben bradley wants to publish. but meryl streep says, hang on, there are reasons why we can't do this, not least of all that it might actually endanger the paper. here is a clip. do you have the papers? not yet. oh gosh, oh gosh, because you know the position that would put me in. you know, we have language in the prospectus. yeah, i know, i know that the backers can change their mind. i know what is at stake. you know, the only couple i knew that both kennedy and lbj wanted to socialise with was you and your husband, and you own the damn paper.
that's the way things worked. politicians and the press, they trusted each other so they could go to the same dinner party, and drink cocktails and tell jokes, while there was a war raging in vietnam. i don't know what we're talking about. i'm not protecting lyndon. no, you've got the man who commissioned the study, he's one of about a dozen party guests out on your... i'm not protecting any of them, i'm protecting the paper. the thing i like about this film is it has a number of intertwining stories. one is the story of kay graham finding her own voice. she's surrounded by men in boardrooms at the beginning. she doesn't really speak, she's slightly like a fish out of water. but during the course of this, she has to step up to the mark and decide what's the right thing to do. second thing is, it runs almost like a prequel to all the president's men. the end of this film runs right into the beginning of all the president's men,
which is a film that i was really, really affected by in the 19705 when it came out. i was a kid when i saw it, and loved it. there's great period detail, sequences in the printing presses attemptingrtoistop the press and gees—leek. attest..— today, in the world in which the press is under attack, all the stuff about fake news. recently we had the so—called fake news awards. it's a film almost like a call to arms for the press, the independent press. from a free press, to truth to power. and it's interesting that what spielberg has done is to take a period piece and tell the story straight, you know, it's not twisted in any way at all,
and tell it in a way which makes it seem urgently contemporary, in terms of its gender politics, in terms of its newspaper politics, in terms of the way it talks about the necessity for a free speech and good reporting, good factual reporting, to keep check on authorities. i mean, i — i've seen the film twice now, and would happily go back and see it a third time. and you don't need to be interested injournalism, or in the issues you've just raised, to like it as a film? i think that helps, and i certainly know some people who aren't interested in those things, and aren't interested in that particular bit of history, who have said, why would you go and see it? you see it because it is a personal drama about those two characters, but also something that leads you very much by the hand. it does assume from the beginning you might not know this stuff, so it gives you a primer. it starts you in a battlefield, and it leads you and tells you all you need to know. i would encourage anyone to go and see it, because i think it's a film that is timely, although it is a period piece. and i think you don't have to be
specifically interested in that war or the pentagon papers orjournalism to find it a gripping drama. and the performances are just great. 0k, fantastic. an animated film is your second choice. and a really good one, coco, the new film from pixar, set in the mexican day of the dead festivities. so 12—year—old miguel longs to be a musician, but his family have banned music, because his great—grandfather years ago chose music over family. so therefore there was no more music in the family anymore. on the magical day of the dead, fate takes a hand in the land of the dead. i thought this was terrifically entertaining, and also very, very touching fare. on the one hand, it has lovely animation and slapstick sequences, and all the sort of stuff you would expect from a pixar vehicle. more importantly, it has great songs, great music. but it's dealing with some very difficult subjects — it's dealing with dementia, it's dealing with memory, it's dealing with death and life, it's dealing with loss. it's dealing with the way people live on, as long as they live on in our memory. and also the way songs and music will linger in our minds sometimes, you know, if anybody has had any experience of people with dementia, music somehow cuts through.
cuts through, doesn't it? there are moments that will make you weep, moments that will make you laugh. in the end, it'll make you cheer. if you liked this film, you see it and you like it, and i really think you will do, there's another film from a few years ago, from 2014, called book of life, which got kind of overlooked. it does have thematic depth. they make a nice companion. go and get book of life on dvd, because it's a different film, but there are great similarities and they are both terrific. ok, the commuter. the premise of the story is quite gripping. the commuter — does it deliver? it's a film with an interesting set up. liam neeson is a ex—cop working as an insurance salesman. the beginning of the film, he loses hisjob, he's doing his commute. he needs money because he has to pay for his kids' tuition. suddenly, vera farmiga turns up and says, i want you to find someone for me. i can't tell you who they are, or what they look like, but if you do it there will be a reward.
here's a clip. someone on this train does not belong. all you have to do is find them. that's it. this person is carrying a bag. you don't know what it looks like, but inside that bag is something they have stolen. this person goes by the name of prynne. it's not a real name. they will be on this train until coldspring. you find them, you find the bag, the $100,000 is yours. don't leave the train before finding the bag. don't tell anyone about this offer. waita minute, waita minute. simple. i thought this was hypothetical. it'sjust one little thing. shouldn't be too hard for an ex—cop. how did you know? oh, that's me. you're being serious, right? you have until next stop to decide. what kind of person are you? ok, so it's intriguing setup. they're strangers on a train.
she has this — find the person, can't tell you why, there will be reward. hitchcockian thrillers — you set up those rules. the rules have to make sense, and you have to obey the rules. what happens, it has an interesting premise and setup, and 20 minutes in it goes, none of this makes sense, and actually, we don't care. it throws the rules out the window. why would he do it? that is thrown out. and itjust gets back into liam neeson walking around the train punching people. and the most frustrating thing is that when you see that clip, you think it's intriguing. why, what's going on? it's literally 20 minutes in, the film just goes, i don't care. i don't think these rules add up to anything. the whole scenario doesn't make a... shall wejust have him punching somebody? and then you get the first punching sequence, and then you go, oh ok, fine, it's taken the train. it's that film you've seen all those times before, except on a train. it reminds you, what happened to that really interesting idea
you threw out the window? ok, fine, moving swiftly on. clearly not a patch on the film of the week, three billboards, which i have not... i've thought about it every single day since i saw it, which is interesting in itself. brilliant performance by frances mcdormand. fantastic. who has a strong chance of winning the best actress oscar. martin mcdonagh, who wrote and directed, has done a really terrificjob. made a tragicomedy that is comic and genuinely tragic. i know the film is divisive. some take against it, and don't get on at all. but i laughed in the bits that are funny, but i also cried, because i think it really deals with tragedy, it really deals with loss. it's really well filmed. there are moments in it that are almost transcendent. they are about, like with coco, life and death. the chaucerian ear for obscenity that martin mcdonagh has rings true. did you love it?
with hindsight, i loved it, i wasn't sure as i was watching, but i think the script is terrific, and it's really stayed with me in a positive way. don't take somebody who doesn't like swearing. that goes without saying. that's the only caveat, isn't it, it's a very striking film. for dvd? so i am not a witch. it turned out in the outstanding debut category at the baftas. a satirical, surreal tale of a young girl who is given a choice to accept life as a witch, or turn into a goat. the director has done a brilliantjob. i thought it was a really remarkable feature, something which, yes, it's funny, yes, it's satirical, but it's also about misogyny and magic. one of those films, again, sometimes you're watching it and don't know whether to laugh or cry, and end up doing both. it's really well worth checking out. thank you, mark. a really, really intriguing week. and many more like that to come, because we're building up to awards season. plenty to come. a reminder, before we go,
you will find all of the film news and reviews from across the bbc on the website. and you can find all our previous programmes on the iplayer as well. it's a cracking week. enjoy your cinema going. thanks for being with us. bye— bye. hello. the weather today has been pretty interesting. that might be a polite way to describe it. very cold for many and outbreaks of rain which has brought flooding and indeed significant snowfall in places. i don't think we will see much of this in the coming days because things at the moment are turning much, much milder and will continue to do so for the rest of the night. still potentially some icy stretches across parts of north—east england and eastern scotland. showers into the north—west, mostly rain showers. rain into the south—west. 3—9 and
thatis rain into the south—west. 3—9 and that is where we will start monday morning. a different feel for many during tomorrow. outbreaks of rain flooding across southern counties and then clearing off quite quickly. still showers into northern scotland where it will be windy. other showers peppering western areas but generally not a bad day. large areas of cloud, some sunny spells, much chilly field —— field. it will turn milder on tuesday with outbreaks of rain at times. that's all from me for now. i'm sharanjit leyl in singapore, the headlines: turkish troops advance into northern syria, targeting an area held by kurdish groups which have been fighting against islamic state. turkey has clearly committed militarily to this operation and has a widespread popular support here. but if the turks suffer losses or civilian casualties grow, that could change. us senators hold a rare sunday session to try to end the budget stalemate that has closed down the federal government.