RICHARD’S BLOG

recent posts

I became a playwright in 1996, having been an avid theatregoer throughout my life (averaging around 120 plays a year – watching, not writing!) I semi-retired from my day job shortly thereafter and for the next 25 years I worked only part-time, allowing me time to write. I ventured briefly into the world of television and wrote a couple of screenplays, although this pretty much came to nothing, except for TAPS making a short film of one of my scripts starring (a virtually unknown) Benedict Cumberbatch and Georgia Mackenzie, which was cool, and sufficient to get me BAFTA membership. Since the pandemic, theatre in the UK has never really found its way back to what it used to be, and so my attention has drifted more towards film. I am now fully retired from my day job and whilst I still visit the theatre two or three times a month, I now watch upwards of 500 films a year (crazy, but true!) Since I watch so many films and can write, I decided to create a blog – it seemed a very 21st-Century thing to do.
  • REVIEW: De Gaulle: Liberté ★★★★☆

    REVIEW: De Gaulle: Liberté ★★★★☆

    De Gaulle: Liberté is the second part of the 2026 epic biographical drama film directed by Antonin Baudry, who co-wrote the screenplay with Bérénice Vila. The first half, De Gaulle: Résistance, I reviewed a few weeks ago. The films had their World Premieres at the Cannes Film Festival in May and Liberté was released in the UK on Friday 18 September.

    Basically, Liberté takes over where Résistance finished, as one might reasonably expect. However, the film does have a different feel to it, with the emphasis more on the political than the action. Now Charles de Gaulle (Simon Abkarian), has to deal with the Americans, and President Roosevelt (Campbell Scott)’s approach to the French is very much less agreeable to the General than that of Winston Churchill (Simon Russell Beale). In addition, his ongoing battle against the puppet French government in Vichy has changed to fighting the puppet French government in Algiers, the primary difference being that General Giraud (Thierry Lhermitte) in Algiers is an American puppet, not a German one.

    The more personal strand dealing with insurrection in France has been beefed up considerably, as one would expect, with the French Resistance gaining structure, although I was surprised at how little we saw of it in action. The focus was again more on the political, with Jean Moulin, codename “Rex” (Félix Kysyl) working to unite the disparate factions behind de Gaulle.

    There is also a significant change to the theatre of war, in that General Marie-Pierre Kœnig who was a key player in part 1 does not appear; instead, we follow General Leclerc (Niels Schneider), his battles in Africa and his parts in the Normandy campaign and the liberation of Paris. Whilst I understand Leclerc’s importance, the non-appearance of Kœnig seemed strange, especially since he was at least as important as Leclerc, being the leader of the Free French in the D-Day Landings.

    Through political sleight of hand, de Gaulle gets the better of Roosevelt, takes over the political leadership from Giraud, and is welcomed to the newly liberated Paris as the conquering hero. History lesson complete.

    If you are interested in Twentieth Century history then this two-part film is for you, provided you remember it is told on the side of the country that won the Second World War: France! As with Résistance, Liberté never drags, despite its 159-minute run-time. It is well written, well directed, and Abkarian’s version of de Gaulle is still just as fascinating as he was in real life. The supporting cast was strong, although the loss of Benoît Magimel playing Kœnig was a disappointment. I should mention Pip Torrens who brought a welcome degree of gravitas to the role of Bernard Montgomery, following Damian Lewis’s laughable performance in the same role in Pressure.

    De Gaulle: Liberté is well worth a few hours of your time, but I would strongly recommend seeing Résistance first. You could try both in one day, although a fortifying meal break in the middle would be a good idea.

  • REVIEW: La Femme Infidèle ★★★★★

    REVIEW: La Femme Infidèle ★★★★★

    La Femme Infidèle (The Unfaithful Wife) is a 1969 French erotic thriller, written and directed by Claude Chabrol. It was re-released across UK cinemas a week last Friday, 11 September, and what a treat it was to see it on the big screen!

    Wealthy insurance broker Charles Desvallées (Michel Bouquet) lives in a beautiful villa in Versailles with his wife, Hélène (Stéphane Audran), and their young son. Hélène often visits Paris, offering her husband a string of almost plausible excuses, but really, she is having an affair with a writer named Victor Pégala (Maurice Ronet). Charles becomes suspicious when he finds Hélène was not where she had claimed and hires a private investigator to follow her. Learning that his wife is having an affair, Charles visits Victor at his flat in Neuilly-sur-Seine.

    A straight-forward old-fashioned plot. I was going to use the word simple, but that is far too condescending. The new-wave directors were huge fans of Hitchcock, and his work is clearly a huge influence here (although Chabrol denied any link), but this is about character and relationships as much as it is about the plot. To use a horse-racing metaphor, this is Hitchcock, out of Rohmer. The performances of Bouquet and Audran are perfectly nuanced – we travel with both of them from their apparent domestic bliss at the beginning, through their separate pain and loss, and back to a newly rekindled love and respect at the end.

    The camerawork is wonderful, lots of languorous panning shots to establish the couple’s idyllic home, and indeed idyllic life. Chabrol’s filmmaking is, as ever, beautifully controlled. The pacing of the storytelling seems just right, never giving anything away too quickly, nor dwelling for too long on unnecessary detail.

    Incidentally, there is a moment where the couple drive past a cinema showing another Chabrol film, Les Biches, which is an interesting nod to several other new-wave films, notably Hiroshima Mon Amour seen at a cinema in Godard’s Breathless, and Summer with Monika on a poster in Trouffaut’s The 400 Blows.

    I have watched La Femme Infidèle many times on DVD, but it was a real treat to see it on the big screen. If you are able to catch this while it is still in cinemas, I would strongly recommend it.

  • REVIEW: Queen at Sea ★★★★☆

    REVIEW: Queen at Sea ★★★★☆

    Queen at Sea is a 2026 drama film written and directed by Lance Hammer. It had its World Premiere at the Berlin International Film Festival in February, where it won the Silver Bear Jury Prize, and was released in the UK last Friday, 11 September.

    Amanda (Juliette Binoche) walks in on her stepfather, Martin (Tom Courtenay), having sex with her mother, Leslie (Anna Calder Marshall), who has advanced dementia. This has been a bone of contention between Amanda and Martin before: Amanda believes that her mother does not want sex. Indeed, Martin has been told by Leslie’s doctor that, due to her mental incapacity, she can no longer give consent, although he cites online sources which dispute this. On the spot, Amanda calls the police and Martin is arrested for sexual assault.

    Amanda, is a tenured academic at Newcastle University who has taken a sabbatical to be close to her ailing mother in London, accompanied by her teenage daughter Sara (Florence Hunt). As Amanda tries to negotiate her mother’s illness, Sara seeks solace in first love, striking up a relationship with a local boy.

    So, we have a neat juxtaposition between first love and late love: Leslie, who may or may not be fit to give her consent; and Sara, who at fifteen definitely cannot, legally. And yet while Amanda calls the police in on Martin, she appears by her actions not only to condone Sara’s decision but to actively encourage it.

    This is a beautifully layered piece of filmmaking. Without ever feeling preachy, it covers the nature of consent, the relationships between mothers and daughters, and the assumptions we make about older people’s sex lives.

    However, at its heart this is a devastating film about dementia, and as such it is not an easy film to watch. Whilst both Courtenay and Calder Marshall are both excellent in their roles (and indeed both won acting awards in Berlin), their situation is utterly heartbreaking and so very difficult to watch.

    For me, this would have been a 5* film, but for one key plot thread fading away without any adequate conclusion. (Whilst I am firmly in favour of not tying up all the loose ends, this one needed something more than it got).

    If you can manage this very difficult watch, Queen at Sea is a very good film and will give you much to think and talk about afterwards; but be warned (again) – it is far from comfortable viewing, in fact it is devastatingly sad, and many will find in distressing.

  • REVIEW: Pressure        ★★☆☆☆

    REVIEW: Pressure        ★★☆☆☆

    Pressure is a 2026 drama film directed by Anthony Maras, from a screenplay which he co-wrote with David Haig, based on Haig’s own 2014 stage play. The film had its World Premiere on general release in the US in May and was released in the UK on Friday, 11 September.

    The future of Europe, and indeed the whole of the free world, hangs in the balance. After almost five long years of war, the allies are poised to invade Normandy. The date is fixed, the troops are trained and ready, air support is on hand, and the navy are all set to deliver their precious cargo to the five target beaches. We just need to check the weather forecast…

    That may sound half-way between glib and melodramatic, but I am afraid that this film errs on the side of unduly melodramatic. One would have thought that there would be sufficient levels of tension and drama in that critical moment in history without the need to trowel on extra fictional layers, however it seems that is not the case. Instead, they play around with the main protagonist’s personal life to heighten the moment, and they play with the timing of the bad weather for dramatic effect. Maybe it is just me, but I did not need this – the dramatised history lesson would have been entirely sufficient, indeed utterly fascinating.

    Back in 2018, I did see David Haig’s play at the Park Theatre in London, with Haig himself in the leading role of Group Captain James Stagg; in the film the part is played by Andrew Scott. I think the play worked much better than the film, because the pressure-cooker environment within a single interior setting is ideal for a stage drama but feels a bit, dare I say, stagey on the big screen. As I recall, the play concentrated more on the characters of Stagg and Eisenhower and the interaction between them, which again I would have liked to see more of in the film.

    Incidentally, I preferred Haig’s take on the character: all bluster and pride, which seemed to me just right for the role; I found Andrew Scott less convincing, however that may be due more to the stripping back of the detailed characterisation in favour of melodrama than to the actor’s own choices. To be fair, Scott was okay as Stagg, and Brendan Fraser was okay as Eisenhower; Kerry Condon was particularly good as Kay Summersby, Eisenhower’s private secretary and confidante, who acted as their go-between.

    So unfortunately, Pressure was not the film for me. I needed more reality and less melodrama. If you are genuinely interested in the actual meteorological events leading up to D-Day, you are better off doing your own research and this is a good place to start.

  • REVIEW: Late Fame ★★★★☆

    REVIEW: Late Fame ★★★★☆

    Late Fame is a 2025 American drama film directed by Kent Jones, from a screenplay by Samy Burch; it is based on the novella of the same name by Arthur Schnitzler. The film had its World Premiere at the Venice International Film Festival in August 2025 and was released in the UK last Friday, 4 September. Interestingly, Schnitzler’s story was written in the late nineteenth century, but the manuscript was lost and it was not published until 2014 – I guess that is, in itself, a kind of late fame.

    Ed Saxberger (Willem Dafoe), a once-feted but now-forgotten poet from the 1970s, works for the Post Office in downtown Manhattan, where he lives a quiet, uneventful life, splitting his time between his mundane job and the bar where he plays pool with his friends in the evenings. One day he is approached by Meyers (Edmund Donovan), an earnest, rather pretentious young man who found a copy of Ed’s 1970 poems Way Past Go on a visit to England and has become a massive fan of his work. He is a member of a group of equally pretentious young New York writers who call themselves The Enthusiasm Society; they meet regularly at an upmarket bar near to where Ed lives. Meyers tells Ed the whole group are huge admirers of his work and invites him along to meet them. They plan to host a cultural event, basically a reading, and Ed agrees to compose an original poem to be read as the star performance of the evening.

    Whilst the changes in Ed create friction with the guys at the local bar, he rather enjoys his ‘rediscovery’ and the potential it brings for a return to the life he once knew. However, he struggles with writer’s block, perhaps brought on from the pressure of having to write to a deadline or perhaps from the continual calls from his sister urging him to visit his estranged brother who is dying in a hospital bed.

    Dafoe is just right as Saxberger, allowing the character’s natural humility to be gradually replaced by a burgeoning pride brought on by the apparent hero-worship of the group. Donovan hits the right note as Mayers and Greta Lee is also very good in the supporting role of Gloria, an actress on the fringes of the group. This is the first time I have come across director Kent Jones, although it is only his second piece of fiction (he has previously directed documentaries). I will try to get hold of a copy of his first, Diane, which he made in 2018. I would also like to read Schnitzler’s novella upon which the film was based – I guess the urge to read and see more is a good sign.

    Late Fame is a nicely understated and nuanced film. If you enjoy slow-paced gentle films, such as Paterson of Perfect Days, then I suspect this one is for you. If you prefer action moves and a strong narrative drive, you might be better avoiding it.

  • REVIEW: Bad Apples ★★★★☆

    REVIEW: Bad Apples ★★★★☆

    Bad Apples is a 2025 dark comedy thriller directed by Jonatan Etzler (in his English-language debut – he is Swedish) from a screenplay by Jess O’Kane, based on the novel De Oönskade by Rasmus Lindgren. It had its World Premiere at the Toronto International Film Festival in September 2025 and will be released in the UK a week next Friday, 18 September.

    Maria Spencer (Saoirse Ronan) is a teacher at a Somerset primary school. Her class of ten-year-olds is regularly disrupted by Danny, who is basically uncontrollable. After a remarkably believable escalating series of events, Maria ends up with Danny locked in her basement. Since he threatens to tell everyone that she attacked him (thus destroying her career), she cannot let him go; so, she decides to care for him herself in the basement. And then along comes another of her charges, Pauline, quite the spookiest little kid you would ever want to meet, and things begin to escalate further as Maria tries to keep a lid on her crime.

    At this stage I should stop explaining the plot. In any case, I need to remind you, as I needed to remind myself, that this is a black comedy. About halfway through the film, I was thinking that it could be a drama – as yet nothing had happened which was all that outrageous. I am sure you’re thinking that a primary school teacher kidnapping a small boy and keeping him in her cellar is a bit weird, but it honestly doesn’t seem it. It appeared to me as the best possible solution to the little b*#!%rs behavioural issues. But fear not, outrageousness is just around the corner.

    Ronan is truly excellent as Maria, however one would expect nothing less. Both the kids do very well in their roles – the lad playing Danny must have had the time of his life – fancy being paid good money to behave really badly. And the supporting cast were also fit for purpose, although nobody really shone out, hence only one adult actor named above. I particularly liked the way the plotting allowed this to develop as a comedy drama until it became so dark and (deliberately) silly that one could have no doubts about the author’s intentions. And Etzler’s direction was tight enough to keep the whole thing barrelling along at just the right pace.

    Bad Apples is a lot of fun – I recommend it without reservation. And perhaps it should be compulsory viewing for education professionals – this is how you should deal with unruly children!

  • REVIEW: I Want Your Sex ★☆☆☆☆

    REVIEW: I Want Your Sex ★☆☆☆☆

    I Want Your Sex is a 2026 American erotic comedy thriller film directed by Gregg Araki, who co-wrote the screenplay with Karley Sciortino. It had its World Premiere at the Sundance Film Festival in January and was released in the UK last Friday, 28 August.

    Erika Tracy (Olivia Wilde) is found floating naked and unconscious in her pool by her 23-year-old lover Elliot (Cooper Hoffman) – the opening scene of Sunset Boulevard inverted.  Then a caption takes us back to 9 ½ weeks earlier. Successful artist Erika is interviewing Elliot for a role as a new assistant in her studio. He gets the job and a few days later she tells him that she wants sex. He seems keen, because although he has a girlfriend, he is not getting any at home. Their relationship quickly takes on a DOM/sub dynamic and whilst Erika is clearly very experienced, Elliot is completely out of his depth. As things develop, things move from consensual to non-consensual to outright abuse. And then we find our way back to the swimming pool. There is a frame-narrative which involves the hapless Elliot being interviewed by the most unlikely looking pair of detectives you are ever likely to see.

    None of the characters were particularly believable, although Olivia Wilde made a good effort with the appalling script she was given to work with. The story was very predictable, and the twist was easier to spot than a tornado in a dustbowl. The camerawork was lazy and there were some particularly poor attempts to convey visually what was in the imagination of the characters. And as for comedy, it was juvenile in the extreme: remember the 9 ½ weeks mentioned above? (snigger, snigger!) well, that was about the level of the humour. However, none of these things was the real problem – unfortunately it was just very dull. I wanted it to end before it was even halfway through, I was so utterly bored.

    I heard someone compare the director, Gregg Araki, to Pedro Almodóvar – ridiculous! Almodóvar understands the words erotic, comedy and thriller and knows how to make them work together in a film. The only comparison which could be valid that I can think of is: Araki is nowhere near as good as Almodóvar!

    I Want Your Sex is a thoroughly bad film. Don’t waste your time and money!

  • REVIEW: De Gaulle: Resistance ★★★★☆

    REVIEW: De Gaulle: Resistance ★★★★☆

    De Gaulle: Resistance is the first part of a 2026 epic biographical drama film directed by Antonin Baudry, who co-wrote the screenplay with Bérénice Vila. It is based on the nonfiction book A Certain Idea of France: The Life of Charles de Gaulle by Julian Jackson. It had its World Premiere at the Cannes Film Festival in May and was released in the UK on Friday 28 August. The second part, De Gaulle: Liberté, will be released in the coming months.

    Following the capitulation of France to the Nazis in June 1940, Charles de Gaulle (Simon Abkarian), flees to London where, on his own initiative, he forms the Free French government-in-exile. He sends emissaries to the French Equatorial African colonies (notably Chad and Middle Congo) and persuades them to ditch their support for the puppet French government in Vichy and throw their lot in with him. He travels to Brazzaville, which he makes the effective capital of Free France in Africa. He instructs the 1st Free French Brigade, under General Marie-Pierre Kœnig (Benoît Magimel), to defend the outpost of Bir Hakeim in the Libyan desert against Rommel’s Afrika Korps. This they do against tremendous odds, holding out for over a fortnight, delaying the German advance through North Africa sufficiently to allow the British Army to regroup prior to the Battle of El Alamein. There ends the (history) lesson.

    The film focuses on de Gaulle’s relationship with Winston Churchill (Simon Russell Beale) and on the continuing struggle against the Vichy Government. It is naturally rather sympathetic to de Gaulle and glorifies many of his deeds, perhaps, overstating their importance to the eventual outcome of the war. Having said that, it makes for a very good war film, in the fine traditions of The Dambusters, The Battle of Britain, The Longest Day, etc, and perhaps they could be charged with the same glorification. After all, it is the victors who write the history books, and indeed make the films.

    A separate strand of the film follows a young French patriot Fernand Bonnier de la Chapelle (Florian Lesieur) who refuses to accept the authority of Vichy, continues to support de Gaulle, and ultimately commits a decisive blow against Vichy in Algeria, but I cannot tell you what he did, because that would spoil the film.

    If you are interested in Twentieth Century history then this is a film for you, provided you don’t take it as gospel – I found a bit of reading around the subject after watching was very useful in obtaining a little balance. However, the film romps along at a good pace, never dragging despite the 158-minute running time. It is well written and well directed, and Abkarian’s de Gaulle is fascinating and annoying in equal measures, just as I am sure the great man was in real life. The supporting cast, of which there are far too many to list, was strong, and I want to mention particularly Magimel who is excellent as Kœnig.

    De Gaulle: Resistance is well worth a few hours of your time and I heartily recommend it. I am looking forward to the second part some time in the next couple of months.

  • REVIEW: Bitter Christmas ★★★★☆

    REVIEW: Bitter Christmas ★★★★☆

    Bitter Christmas is a 2026 Spanish tragi-comedy film, written and directed by Pedro Almodóvar. It was released theatrically in Spain on 20 March, had its international premiere at the Cannes Film Festival in May, and was released in the UK on Friday 28 August.

    There are two distinct strands in play here: one, set in 2025, is the story of a writer trying to perfect his latest screenplay (called Bitter Christmas) and struggling to find the right ending; the second, set in 2004, is his screenplay, which is about a writer trying to perfect her latest screenplay and struggling to find the right ending. Confused? I suspect many in the audience were, however, that is the fun of a film like this –unravelling the complexities of the plot as it plays out.

    The screenwriter in 2025, Raúl (Leonardo Sbaraglia) uses events in the lives of his boyfriend, Santi (Quim Gutiérrez) and his devoted assistant, Mónica (Aitana Sánchez-Gijón). He has set the film-within-a-film in 2004 because he suffered his first panic attack that year, while trying to write a screenplay. Elsa (Bárbara Lennie), the screenwriter in 2004, is clearly his alter-ego: she similarly has a panic attack and uses events in the lives of her lover and her friends.

    This is a film about autofiction, however as to the extent to which it is itself autofiction, I am not qualified to say – I know little about Almodóvar’s life, only his films. This does feel a natural step following on from his 2019 film Pain and Glory, which continued a path that had begun with The Flower of My Secret (1995) and Broken Embraces (2009), all of which I loved; but then I do love films about writing, as I am sure is apparent from previous posts.

    Almodóvar gets the best from his actors, and they are all just right for their roles. I felt the level of confusion was pitched perfectly and when I left the cinema I had it all neatly worked out in my head – I think! I do intend to revisit the film again in a couple of weeks’ time to watch it with the advantage of knowing the plot in advance, partly to see if I have it right and partly because I feel films as good as this deserve a second viewing; I am sure there will be many things I missed first time around.

    Bitter Christmas is unashamedly a cinephile’s film. If you like films about film, you will like this. If you find that a bit self-indulgent, or if you like less complex plotting, it may not be for you. However, at the risk of repetition: I loved it!

  • REVIEW: One Night Only ★★☆☆☆

    REVIEW: One Night Only ★★☆☆☆

    One Night Only is a 2026 American romantic comedy film, directed by Will Gluck from a screenplay by Travis Braun. It had its World Premiere at a cinema in Manhattan earlier this month and was released in the UK yesterday, Friday 28 August.

    The premise: premarital sex has been banned in the United States (really?) and for some reason even more bizarre than this, there is a 12-hour amnesty for one night each year, and so on this night everyone goes out with the one objective of getting laid as many times as possible in 12 hours. I kid you not!

    The story follows sex-starved Allie (Monica Barbaro) and Owen (Callum Turner), who continually cross paths on this special night as they comb New York looking for sex. This is presumably the only night of the year when condoms outsell Kleenex, and indeed much of the very silly plot involves trying to track down that elusive last condom.

    Clearly the premise is nonsense. In addition, the plot is creaky and predictable, and the screenplay is truly awful. So how come it gets two stars? Well, Barbaro and Turner are pretty good, and there is a certain chemistry between them which managed to keep me in my seat for the whole one hundred minutes – just. There are some funny moments, but they are few and far between and whilst I hate the expression cringe-worthy, this is truly cringe-worthy. But well done the two stars for keeping the film moving and vaguely interesting – the script isn’t your fault – so I have given you a star each!

    Unfortunately, One Night Only does not refer to the cinema run of the film and since it is vaguely possible that you could actually walk into a cinema to escape from the rain, and believe me that scenario is more credible than this plot, I must advise don’t. Stay out in the rain – it is more satisfying.