:00:35. > :00:41.On tonight's Review Show, Brenda and Olympia as a lesbian couple in
:00:41. > :00:45.a mad cap road drip. A new exhibition of the mind. More
:00:45. > :00:50.psychological exploration and TV writer Noah Hawley's new novel.
:00:50. > :00:56.Beating oppression in Iran with a camera, in a hit new documentary,
:00:56. > :00:59.This Is Not A Film. And Werner Herzog on his latest, and
:00:59. > :01:05.characteristically cheery look at life on death row.
:01:05. > :01:07.A rip roaring insight from the new guests on the sofa. Matthew Sweet,
:01:07. > :01:14.whose book, Shepperton Babylon, charts the history of British
:01:14. > :01:18.cinema. The playwright Mark Ravenhill, famous for shopping at
:01:18. > :01:22.(coug h) and in residence in the RSC.
:01:22. > :01:25.And the former editor of the International Film Festival.
:01:25. > :01:35.Remember however eminent the views of Matthew Mark and Hannah, we love
:01:35. > :01:36.
:01:36. > :01:38.to hear your views. Share them on Twitter. Now in its 26th year, the
:01:38. > :01:43.London Gay and Lesbian Film Festival is established. We have
:01:44. > :01:47.chosen two films to review, one dark and the other a kooky comedy.
:01:47. > :01:52.The festival kicked off with Cloudburst, a film part road trip,
:01:52. > :01:57.part rom com. As so often with gay cinema, it pushes the boundaries,
:01:57. > :02:02.both by being the story of a mature lesbian couple, and by providing
:02:02. > :02:08.strong lead roles for two older actresses, Oscar winners, Olympia
:02:08. > :02:12.Dukakis and Brenda Fricker. I play Dottie, I love the name, she's
:02:12. > :02:16.blind, she's old and fat, so unlike me, she falls out of the bed
:02:16. > :02:20.laughing one night, and damages herself. Her granddaughter wants to
:02:20. > :02:26.put her into a home, which means they would be separated. They are
:02:26. > :02:34.not going to have that. They decide to drive to Canada and get married
:02:34. > :02:42.and be together forever. Are you proposing to me? Maybe.
:02:42. > :02:47.Are you down on one knee? Yeah. I don't believe in marriage. I was
:02:47. > :02:51.married, remember, that was like having a brain clot. Most love
:02:51. > :02:56.stories about the beginning of love, the difference was about trying to
:02:56. > :03:03.parlez the idea of what it is like to have been together for so long,
:03:03. > :03:08.and this sort of how love comes with frustration and anger and
:03:08. > :03:11.disappointment. Maybe we could work out some sort of trial commitment?
:03:11. > :03:16.How about 100 years. I was thinking of six months.
:03:16. > :03:20.At a time when the issue of gay marriage is a political hot potato,
:03:20. > :03:23.does the film take a particular stance? I discovered early on in
:03:23. > :03:26.the writing process, if I was going to be honest about the point of
:03:26. > :03:30.view of these two character, there was nothing political to say.
:03:30. > :03:32.Because when people are getting married, nobody is thinking about
:03:32. > :03:37.politics. You are thinking very much with all of your focus about
:03:37. > :03:40.the person you are about to marry. It is the world's first geriatric
:03:40. > :03:46.lesbian road movie. I think you are right. That is a very good
:03:46. > :03:52.description, yeah. From the tale of who older lesbians,
:03:52. > :03:57.to the sexually awakening of a young man, comes Absent. Toying
:03:57. > :04:02.with convent actual attitudes to under-age relationships, it hinges
:04:02. > :04:12.on the attraction of a young teenage boy to his swimming
:04:12. > :04:30.
:04:30. > :04:35.instructor, with moral ambiguity Presented as a dark thriller in the
:04:36. > :04:43.south American role, dark glances play more of a part than dialogue.
:04:43. > :04:48.It plays with audience expectations and is an oblique look at a taboo.
:04:48. > :04:52.Both films explore passion and love from different portions of liefpl.
:04:52. > :04:55.Is there anything new from well worn themes. Two very different
:04:55. > :05:00.films, but let's deal with Cloudburst first, you were there at
:05:00. > :05:05.the opening. How was it received? It was received with great rapttuer
:05:05. > :05:12.and joy and laughter. It is a very -- rappure and joy and laughter. It
:05:12. > :05:17.is a very theatrical film. It started as a play, with central
:05:17. > :05:21.performances, they have fantastic comical timing. There was applause
:05:21. > :05:27.and laughter, the film is edited to allow it to play to a big popular
:05:27. > :05:34.audience like that and be a big experience. It is a road movie in
:05:34. > :05:38.the tile of Paris-Texas and Thelma and Louise? There are no surprises,
:05:38. > :05:45.apart from one scene where Brenda Fricker and Olympia Dukakis are
:05:45. > :05:48.trying to shed the load of a nude man who has got into the bed of
:05:48. > :05:52.their truck. It is an extraordinary scene. It is one of the most
:05:52. > :05:59.conventional films I have seen. There is no adventure in it any way.
:05:59. > :06:03.And yet, it seems absolutely churlish to bring that in at all,
:06:03. > :06:09.it is uproariously funny. There is nothing particularly to say, it is
:06:09. > :06:13.a lesbian film, except what you have is two older actresss? There
:06:13. > :06:17.is some extremely foul language, the way Olympia Dukakis's character
:06:17. > :06:22.talks I was genuinely shocked, and I have seen a lot of movies. What I
:06:22. > :06:30.found odd and jarring was the combination of this sentimental
:06:30. > :06:34.premise, beautiful cinematography, and beautiful score, and
:06:34. > :06:40.conventionally things, and then this disgusting language, I didn't
:06:40. > :06:45.know if it split the people being OK about that. A foul mouthed old
:06:45. > :06:53.person, at 83 you can say what you want. What is important about that,
:06:53. > :07:00.some of that foul mouthedness she is expressing her sexuality, her
:07:00. > :07:04.crush on KD Lang and what she wants to do with her is great.
:07:04. > :07:09.They have both been battered by life, it was a road movie with a
:07:09. > :07:14.difference, it was not a optimistic start-out, it was the optimistic-
:07:14. > :07:18.end of life. I love the characters saying I loved you when you were
:07:18. > :07:22.fat and when you went blind. You don't see that in movies, when you
:07:22. > :07:26.see people get old and in love in movies they are old and beautiful.
:07:26. > :07:30.The fact they are old seems more important than they are two women.
:07:30. > :07:34.This idea, we said at the beginning of the programme, that the lesbian
:07:34. > :07:39.and gay festival has been determinedly anti-establishment,
:07:39. > :07:43.this and The Kids Are All right, puts sexuality in a different
:07:43. > :07:47.position now? I would question the film maker's claim of the lack of
:07:47. > :07:51.politics. Firstly, those women come to realise they don't have a legal
:07:51. > :07:54.right to be together and get married. Also that marriage brings
:07:54. > :07:58.them out of the closet, they have been able to live in this small
:07:58. > :08:03.community, and even their close family are able to pretend they are
:08:03. > :08:07.two girls who love each other and share a bed and it is nothing
:08:07. > :08:10.lesbian. The marriage makes the family confront it is a loving and
:08:10. > :08:14.sexual relationship they have. There is the pre-wedding, lovely
:08:14. > :08:18.night in the bar in Canada, all Canadians are fabulous. A lot of
:08:18. > :08:22.this funding came from Canada. That actually is where the hitch hiker
:08:22. > :08:27.they pick up does this bestman's speech, I thought that was pretty
:08:27. > :08:31.moving? That's a moment that everybody will applaud. Isn't it?
:08:31. > :08:36.There is no sense that this is a difficult or dangerous subject, in
:08:36. > :08:40.any way at all. This is a film, this is a family film, apart from
:08:40. > :08:46.the language. It makes you say this is completely logical, these two
:08:47. > :08:50.people should be together. The humour is broad and slapsticky, to
:08:50. > :08:56.a an irritating extent. You think these people should be together
:08:56. > :09:03.whether you like them or not. stick might be the wrong word for
:09:03. > :09:09.it, it is Brenda Fricker's face sliding with one of the actor's
:09:09. > :09:13.peniss! There is purely theatrical timing, when she's released from an
:09:13. > :09:18.old people's homes and doors and looks and timing. You have what is
:09:18. > :09:22.essentially an exuberant film, to one that is absolutely downplayed
:09:22. > :09:27.to the point of actually, very, very quiet acting, if indeed it
:09:27. > :09:32.seems like acting at all in Absence? The acting is quiet. The
:09:32. > :09:35.score is the problem, it is as though the director has constructed
:09:35. > :09:40.the most wonderfully ambiguous film, full of these teasing, tense images,
:09:40. > :09:47.that are very, very difficult to read, and has thought, I know, what
:09:47. > :09:53.this really needs is the soundtrack of Scream 3 played over the top,
:09:53. > :09:57.this horror film music that bullies you into responding to it in a
:09:57. > :10:04.certain way. It is the reverse Lolita, this under-age boy is
:10:04. > :10:08.entrapping the older man? What I thought is in Lolita, the key line
:10:08. > :10:12."reader, it was she who seduced me". Whether you believe that or not?
:10:12. > :10:18.is seeing the seduction of the young boy coming on to him and he's
:10:18. > :10:21.innocent. What you can't get away from in this film, as beautiful as
:10:21. > :10:27.the cinematography, there is a score going, feel this, feel this,
:10:27. > :10:31.all the time. In terms of themes, these are well worn themes in both
:10:31. > :10:36.films, is this film telling a different story? It is essentially
:10:36. > :10:40.a film about stuff that is deferred, suppressed desire that can't be
:10:40. > :10:44.realised until the very final image of the film, and then is it real or
:10:44. > :10:49.not. There is this ghost boy that leads the central character through
:10:49. > :10:53.this experience. I thought the cinematography, the composition of
:10:53. > :10:59.the shots, colour, was equisite, I just didn't quite believe it. It
:10:59. > :11:05.seemed like somebody who knew a lot about cinema, it felt like a fan's
:11:05. > :11:09.film, there was a lot of Hitchcock imagery in it, right down to shower
:11:09. > :11:13.curtains and entering into the teacher's bedroom with the boy,
:11:13. > :11:18.refractured through the mirrors, that led us into the score. I
:11:18. > :11:21.thought at the end of the day it seems an exercise about ambiguity,
:11:21. > :11:26.an exercise about deferred passion, rather than coming from a real
:11:26. > :11:30.place. Maybe there is something about Argentinian culture I don't
:11:30. > :11:34.understand, it seemed artificial. There is an academic quality, it
:11:34. > :11:38.seems one of these films that has been constructed to prove that
:11:38. > :11:42.everything is in the eye of the beholder, the view is actively
:11:42. > :11:45.reading the image. It is more important than the what is in the
:11:45. > :11:48.frame itself. Do you think underpinning it is the idea of
:11:49. > :11:52.ethics and behaviour and the boundaries that exist within
:11:52. > :11:56.institutions? Certainly. Whether it has anything much to say about
:11:56. > :12:00.those things I don't know. That is certainly the arena of it. The one
:12:00. > :12:04.thing about the score is it constructs the sex act as a crime
:12:04. > :12:09.in a very dramatic way, in a Hitchcockian way, but it does it
:12:09. > :12:14.too much. It took us into a camp area, melodrama, which the rest of
:12:14. > :12:19.the film didn't, it was odd. terms of the kind of films, we only
:12:19. > :12:24.reviewed two, but do you think actually, lesbian gay film festival,
:12:24. > :12:28.should that still exist? I think certainly in terms of the audience
:12:28. > :12:32.demand, every ticket is sold. That festival could run or two or three
:12:32. > :12:36.times as long and be packed. There are so many of these festivals
:12:36. > :12:40.around the world, every city has one, I think sometimes there is a
:12:40. > :12:45.shortage, sometimes there is a greater demand than there is supply
:12:45. > :12:49.of gay films. I think as the gay and lesbian community become more
:12:49. > :12:53.assimilated into the mainstream culture, what is a gay aesthetic,
:12:53. > :12:57.is much more problematic. It is a rich festival, these aren't really
:12:57. > :13:03.the best two films in it, I don't think. There is the South African
:13:03. > :13:07.film, Beauty, an exploration of a similar theme to the one we have
:13:07. > :13:15.been discussing. There is far more to it than just this. We chose two
:13:15. > :13:19.and they were pretty good to choose. The LGLFF, try to say that, the BFI
:13:19. > :13:26.runs until Sunday. Intergenerational of a different
:13:26. > :13:32.kind by a new novel by Noah Hawley, who uses a dark canvas to explain
:13:32. > :13:38.the strains and limits of the paternal bond.
:13:38. > :13:42.Noah Hawley is an established name in the United Statesing films and
:13:42. > :13:47.TV shows, including Bones, in its seventh series. His latest venture
:13:47. > :13:54.is fourth book but UK debut, The Good Father, it tells the story of
:13:54. > :14:00.Dr Rosemary Leonard, a respected -- Dr Paul Allen, a respected
:14:00. > :14:04.rheumatologist, he find out his son is abroad and connected to the
:14:04. > :14:09.assassination of a presidential candidate. As we watched, the
:14:09. > :14:13.gunman turned into the crowd, the Secret Service tried to reach him,
:14:13. > :14:17.the camera swung wildly, the agents tried to reach them, they were lost
:14:17. > :14:22.to the camera. I got closer to the TV, but rather than make things
:14:22. > :14:27.clear it played them harder to identify. The words of the anchor
:14:27. > :14:31.that the police have identify the gunman. The doorbell rang.
:14:31. > :14:35.I came up with the idea when my wife was pregnant with our first
:14:35. > :14:41.child, I came to wonder who my daughter would grow up to be. I
:14:41. > :14:44.started to think about a story of a man whose son was accused of a
:14:44. > :14:48.crime, and he was going to fight to prove that his son was innocent,
:14:48. > :14:51.but at the same time he would have to come to terms with the fact that
:14:51. > :14:56.he might not have been the best father.
:14:56. > :15:01.The terrors of parenthood are well trodden territory in literature,
:15:01. > :15:08.most recently in Lionel Shriver's We Need To Talk About Kevin. But
:15:08. > :15:12.Hawley's take is a psychopath tholg of the father, who unearthed truths
:15:12. > :15:16.about his own shortcomings. have a 20-year-old like this who
:15:16. > :15:21.shoots a politician, and walks into a High School, any of these things,
:15:21. > :15:26.it is hard not to blame the parents. It is tough, and at what age do we
:15:26. > :15:29.stop being responsible for the actions of our children. If I'm a
:15:29. > :15:34.25-year-old man, can I still blame my parents, for where I am in my
:15:34. > :15:37.life, 30, 40. I would like to think at a certain age your childhood is
:15:37. > :15:44.no longer relevant. During the course of his investigations, pall
:15:44. > :15:48.draws on past cases of mass murder and -- pall draws on past cases of
:15:48. > :15:52.mass murder, and the case of Gabrielle Giffords. Has Hawley
:15:52. > :15:58.managed to weave fiction and real life together in a way that offers
:15:58. > :16:02.new insights into the troubles of fatherhood.
:16:02. > :16:05.It seems in this book it is the opposite of We Need To Talk About
:16:05. > :16:10.Kevin, this is a man exploring the nature of his own guilt, or his
:16:10. > :16:16.son's guilt, and his son's guilt? It feels like a repost to it. We
:16:16. > :16:18.Need To Talk About Kevin puts the child as this evil incub bus, who
:16:18. > :16:23.springs from nowhere, and terrorises the parent. Here it is
:16:23. > :16:27.the opposite. He's very, very interested in the geneology of that
:16:27. > :16:31.process, and how a child can become a killer. This is a book with a
:16:31. > :16:35.kind of identity crisis. There is some beautiful writing in it, but
:16:35. > :16:41.there is also things that are best suited to the fax machine than the
:16:41. > :16:49.novel, I think. The airport writer, inside him, is reasserting itself,
:16:49. > :16:54.maybe that is in his geneology. he's using it at the start to hook
:16:54. > :16:58.you in, like television writing, it changes gears, it starts, you
:16:58. > :17:00.really start to think about this book as seriously about guilt, full
:17:00. > :17:03.stop? It is interesting about built, it is particularly interesting
:17:03. > :17:07.about loyalty. For me the key point of the book is when the son, in
:17:07. > :17:11.prison, says to the father, what if I was guilty, would you still be
:17:11. > :17:16.doing all of this, by is clear his flame, the answer has to be yes,
:17:16. > :17:21.because the point of being loyal and loving your family, is
:17:21. > :17:25.protected whatever, that means protecting if they try to kill the
:17:25. > :17:30.potential President. We don't give away the end of the book? We don't
:17:30. > :17:35.know if he was guilty and who died. There is an odd sort of perspective
:17:35. > :17:39.of the book. The perspective of the protaganist and the reader, with
:17:39. > :17:44.the reader he keeps telling you things you know. He can't imagine
:17:44. > :17:47.people not knowing, the Mansen family, they were crazy people, and
:17:47. > :17:51.Robert Kennedy. It has a quality of telling you things that are obvious.
:17:51. > :17:55.In terms it of the position of the protaganist, you don't know if the
:17:55. > :17:58.stuff you are hearing about the child's experience is coming from
:17:58. > :18:04.the father's perspective or what actually happened. It felt confused
:18:04. > :18:08.in that regard. The Doctor feels the need to tell you things, they
:18:08. > :18:12.are in control. What he is, as he loses control during the book, only
:18:12. > :18:16.thing he feels factually in control of are stories that really happened
:18:16. > :18:21.to real people? As the protaganist loses control, it is like the
:18:21. > :18:25.author really finds his voice. There is this weird mixture of
:18:25. > :18:30.airport novel writing, sometimes almost end of chapters ending as
:18:30. > :18:34.next episode there will be. They are like ad breaks. A lot of the
:18:34. > :18:36.establishing stuff about him being a doctor, felt like brilliant
:18:36. > :18:40.research, and somebody writing from a doctor's point of view. Then all
:18:40. > :18:45.of that falls away, the second half of the book you get this fantastic
:18:45. > :18:51.mediation on what it means to be a parent, and giplt, and how much
:18:51. > :18:56.people inher rite from -- guilt and how much people inherit from their
:18:56. > :19:00.parents. And the trimmings of the political campaign that felt a
:19:00. > :19:03.little bit received as well. I wonder if it needed that. Just
:19:03. > :19:08.this central thing of your son might have killed somebody, and how
:19:08. > :19:12.much are you implicated in that, just grows and grows as a book. By
:19:12. > :19:16.the end you feel you are reading a classic writer, at the beginning
:19:16. > :19:20.you feel you have picked up something you could throw away in
:19:20. > :19:24.an airport. That central theme of whether children of divorced
:19:24. > :19:28.parents or not, the fragility of the relationship between the parent
:19:28. > :19:32.and child, no matter what circumstances, Hawley talks about
:19:32. > :19:37.it himself, is extraordinary, and where responsibility ends and self-
:19:37. > :19:44.reliance begins? I think this boy was clearly damaged. We can tell
:19:44. > :19:48.there was this early incident, he is on a journey from one end of
:19:48. > :19:52.America to another seeing his parents. Then the plane goes into a
:19:52. > :19:55.nose dive. That was a fantastic metaphor for the whole book? It is
:19:55. > :20:01.very convincing the process of how this guy is trying to examine
:20:01. > :20:04.everything that has happened, sifting through the whole biography,
:20:04. > :20:09.worrying whether the child, that's what it is, but it is something
:20:09. > :20:17.else, he's looking for a kind of story, he wants his son's story to
:20:17. > :20:24.be the story of the Manchurian candidate, but it won't fit. It is
:20:24. > :20:28.not the story of Taxi Driver right, you can't lean on it and get it
:20:28. > :20:32.wrong, it is not about a taxi driver falling in love with a
:20:32. > :20:37.teenage prostitute. He retraces the son's steps, it is a road movie.
:20:37. > :20:43.You get a fantastic sense of America and its huge distances.
:20:43. > :20:45.the boy wanting to lose himself in it? You also get the sense that the
:20:45. > :20:50.parent can never completely know the child. You can go on the
:20:50. > :20:53.journey, he starts to do exact low the things the boy has done, taking
:20:53. > :20:58.on his vocabulary and actions, ultimately accepting that you can
:20:58. > :21:01.never know your own child. child can change its name and deny
:21:01. > :21:06.you. There was one episode in the book, where he goes to stay with
:21:06. > :21:12.the parents of a girl he knew at Vassar for one year, who sound like
:21:12. > :21:19.great parent, he goes there, and spends a few months with them, in a
:21:19. > :21:25.new nuclear family, and happy -- happier than he has ever been,
:21:25. > :21:28.guting for his father. That is where he picks up his potential
:21:28. > :21:33.killer skills. The Good Father, published by Hodder & Stroughton,
:21:33. > :21:40.is in all good books and libraries. From the exploration of troubled
:21:40. > :21:45.minds to the exploration of the fiscal brain. The Wellcome
:21:45. > :21:48.Collection lifts the lid on the most ex siting grey matter of human
:21:48. > :21:53.existence, the human brain. The human brain contains more than a
:21:53. > :21:57.billion nerve cells, it is the most intricate and least understood
:21:58. > :22:04.organ. We are taken from the benign to sinister, from horror movie
:22:04. > :22:10.posters to ubegin INGs, in order to grb eugenics, in order to shed
:22:10. > :22:15.light on the grey matter. Some people would hold the brain to be
:22:15. > :22:19.the most complex object in the universe. It contains billions of
:22:19. > :22:23.brain cells and not well understood by the public. It is even less
:22:23. > :22:29.often seen. So that is why we wanted to put on an exhibition that
:22:29. > :22:33.created an encounter with this extraordinary, but unique organ.
:22:33. > :22:38.More than 150 objects are on display, ranging from segments of
:22:39. > :22:44.real brains, preserved from figures such as Einstein, and serial killer,
:22:45. > :22:48.Jason Burkett, through to art, videos and manuscripts. The
:22:48. > :22:52.exhibition is split into our sections, measuring and classifying
:22:52. > :22:56.looks at how scientists have tried to understand how the brain
:22:56. > :22:59.functions. While mapping and modelling focuses on how the
:22:59. > :23:03.Britain has been visually represented. Cutting shows the
:23:03. > :23:08.surgical desection of the brain, and the giving and taking section,
:23:08. > :23:12.looks at the difficult politics of brain donation and medical research.
:23:12. > :23:15.The approach here has been to investigate, not only the artistic
:23:15. > :23:19.ramifications of health and medicine, but also the
:23:19. > :23:24.philosophical ones too. We hope that people will come away from the
:23:24. > :23:29.exhibition with an appreciation of the nature the brain, but not
:23:29. > :23:34.really from a detailed neuropsychological perspective,
:23:34. > :23:43.rather than a social perspective, formed by the nature of the brain
:23:43. > :23:46.as this rather delicate substance. I mean, an appreciation of the
:23:46. > :23:50.brain is absolutely right, one can't imagine why there wasn't been
:23:50. > :23:53.an exhibition like this before. Because it is so endlessly
:23:53. > :23:57.fascinating, you realise you are no further forward with understanding
:23:57. > :24:02.how the brain works, than you were and could ever be? I think that
:24:02. > :24:10.probably reflects where we are. The brain is still a huge mystery to us.
:24:10. > :24:14.I quite regularly have my brain scanned. I have a scar on the right
:24:14. > :24:18.asipital lobe, I'm used to looking at pictures of my brain. Going to
:24:18. > :24:23.the exhibition, you realise the image of the brain in the jar, is a
:24:23. > :24:27.Gothic image of Frankenstein and horror movies and Doctor Who, there
:24:27. > :24:31.is a certain, pure, house of horrors aspect to the exhibition.
:24:31. > :24:36.As I journeyed around it, there were a few times I thought I might
:24:36. > :24:40.keel over, and one moment where I felt I was just about to go. I
:24:40. > :24:44.learned a lot, one of the things I learned was that image of a brain
:24:44. > :24:48.in the jar still has the horror movie power. I still couldn't get
:24:48. > :24:52.over the fact that, again, they are lined up in jars, they are sliced
:24:52. > :24:58.up, they are diced, everything, they are made into beautiful works
:24:58. > :25:04.of art. You can't get away from the fact that it is inside here? This
:25:04. > :25:08.presents the brain as a cut of meat, as brisket, or rump, or something
:25:08. > :25:12.like that. We are so used, because we are so enthralled to
:25:12. > :25:16.neuroscience right now, every week a book comes out saying we are hard
:25:16. > :25:21.wired to do this, and setting up the brain is almost like this God-
:25:21. > :25:26.like entity. It seemed really refreshing to be reminded it is
:25:26. > :25:29.just this rather preposterous globy object, to some extent.
:25:29. > :25:34.illustrations, what I found most enthralling about the investigation,
:25:34. > :25:38.it was very interesting in many ways and covers a huge amount of
:25:38. > :25:41.ground. Was the brilliant illustrations and diagrams that are
:25:41. > :25:47.very prety. I found my self- wondering whether we are drawn to
:25:47. > :25:51.certain kinds of patterns, some of them look like beautiful Victorian
:25:51. > :25:56.wallpaper. Maybe we are drawn to them because it is already in there.
:25:56. > :26:01.Some of the things commissioned for this, there was an partist who had
:26:01. > :26:06.dyslexia, had the MRI, a cross section of the MRI of her brain,
:26:06. > :26:11.set in perspex. You can walk through her sed. It is
:26:11. > :26:19.extraordinary. Before we get to the cultural beauty of it. We should
:26:19. > :26:23.talk about ECT trepanning, and eugenics, people writing to
:26:23. > :26:29.families saying your children are almost dead. We see the heart-
:26:29. > :26:33.breaking, shocking documentaries, the products of Nazi hospitals, you
:26:33. > :26:37.see the children whose brain will be claimed soon by some scientist.
:26:37. > :26:42.A photograph from above by a rostrum camera. You can see some of
:26:42. > :26:45.them are still fighting, and some of them have given up. It is
:26:45. > :26:50.profoundly shocking. There is a letter in it, from a woman whose
:26:50. > :26:54.baby is dying of meningitis, who writes to an eminent brain
:26:54. > :26:58.scientist in America in the 50s, saying, would you like this brain.
:26:58. > :27:01.Maybe this can be of some benefit. We should say it is not just Nazis,
:27:01. > :27:07.that is not just doctors. There are these heart-breaking letters saying
:27:07. > :27:11.your child won't make it. It is not just Nazi investigations, there is
:27:12. > :27:15.some dubious ends to this research, there is also just a very poignant
:27:15. > :27:19.thing about the mystery of what goes wrong and how you sort it out.
:27:19. > :27:25.One of the things that struck me, and they make the point early on,
:27:25. > :27:28.is the brain isn't always central of the idea of who we are, for
:27:28. > :27:32.Aristotle the brain was number seven after the liver. It is only
:27:32. > :27:35.in the last 200 years we have come to think of ourselves, not located
:27:35. > :27:38.in the Full Heart Company or the guts, but more and more in the
:27:38. > :27:42.brain. If anything is done to the brain or violated and used in a
:27:42. > :27:46.certain way, for us it is the centre being attacked. The idea of
:27:46. > :27:51.doing your head in is new. It used to be something in your stomach.
:27:51. > :27:54.They say the gut is the second nervous system. Then there is the
:27:54. > :28:00.absolute beauty, again you are talking about, we are drawn to
:28:00. > :28:05.things that look beautiful, also, the idea that almost like some of
:28:05. > :28:10.the drawings were botanical, there is an extraordinary detail? There
:28:10. > :28:16.is a sculpture, with the Kapil rees of the brain have been filled in
:28:16. > :28:19.with plastic, it looks like a piece of coral, it is gorgeous, it shows
:28:19. > :28:24.you the patterns are mirrored throughout nature. Then, what you
:28:24. > :28:27.have, as well, is the idea you have the brain of Einstein, and the
:28:27. > :28:32.brain of Burke, we should be able to see something looking at the
:28:32. > :28:37.brains, telling us this man was a genius, this man was a killer? The
:28:37. > :28:44.idea that we could do that, we haven't cracked that one? Quite a
:28:44. > :28:48.lot of the exhibition looked at the same similarity, the lumps on your
:28:48. > :28:55.brain indicating your character. The amazing fact that you see, the
:28:55. > :28:58.British society of fronolog y wasn't disbanded until 1968. Until
:28:58. > :29:02.then people were meeting, producing a journal, still with the theory
:29:02. > :29:08.that the shape of your brain would dictate whether you were a criminal.
:29:08. > :29:14.One of the loading brain surgeries in this country, in the 1940s, was
:29:14. > :29:17.a Dr Cushing. At the end of the exhibition you see some of the
:29:17. > :29:21.horror pictures, the man with two brains, and the brain and all that,
:29:21. > :29:26.did it make you think differently about yourselves when you left?
:29:26. > :29:30.think it takes the brain down a peg or two. In a way. It slightly
:29:30. > :29:35.rejects this idea that the brain is the centre of everything, by making
:29:36. > :29:43.us more aware of it as a gloopy physical object. If you fancy
:29:43. > :29:48.looking at your brain in a serious way, Brains is open at the Wellcome
:29:48. > :29:52.Institute until June. How does a virtual mind cope with incars
:29:52. > :29:56.nation. That is the question at the heart of a film made by Jafar
:29:56. > :30:00.Panahi, whose film had an extraordinary journey to the west,
:30:00. > :30:07.via a USB stick hidden in a birthday cake.
:30:07. > :30:16.In 20 010, one of the leading lights of Iranian city, Jafar
:30:16. > :30:20.Panahi, -- film Iranian cinema, Jafar Panahi, was taken by the
:30:20. > :30:26.authorities and sentenced to prison. He created a new work, This Is Not
:30:26. > :30:33.A Film, a not film that was shot in ten days. He documents his desire
:30:33. > :30:37.to make films, with his virtual confinement at home. He puts out
:30:37. > :30:41.his vision for a film the authorities won't let him make,
:30:41. > :30:51.mapping it out on the floor at home. The process increasingly leaves him
:30:51. > :30:55.
:30:55. > :31:00.Presented as a day in the life of a director, serious moments when
:31:00. > :31:06.Panahi plans his appeal against his sentence with lawyers, are inter%ed
:31:06. > :31:16.with scenes from every day life -- interspersed with scenes from every
:31:16. > :31:37.
:31:37. > :31:40.day life. He puts previous work in The fear of further persecution by
:31:40. > :31:43.the authorities is ever present, with coded phone calls and constant
:31:44. > :31:53.concerns for the safety of his family, highlighting the volatile
:31:54. > :32:06.
:32:06. > :32:11.Panahi's courageous act of rebellion received rave reviews
:32:11. > :32:18.across the festival circuit. Is it anything more than a howl against
:32:18. > :32:23.censorship? What's extraordinary is we don't
:32:23. > :32:28.know, we think Panahi is still in his flat awaiting the appeal on the
:32:28. > :32:32.six-year sentence. He's still under house arrest. When this film gets a
:32:32. > :32:38.limited distribution, we don't know what will happen to him. Was it
:32:38. > :32:45.more than just an act of defiance, in terms of cinematic
:32:45. > :32:55.graphicically? In the context of Iranian cinema, it is conventional
:32:55. > :32:55.
:32:55. > :33:00.to make films about being film maker, he's drawing on Kier st.
:33:00. > :33:05.Armer. He can work within the regime? Panahi is fitting in more
:33:05. > :33:10.with the conventions of Iranian cinema doing this film, rather than
:33:10. > :33:15.doing Kristy and The Circle, which were more anti-establishment. Not
:33:15. > :33:17.this film is anti-establishment, but he is reflecting here. He's
:33:17. > :33:21.fantastic company. It is not really so much about the film he's not
:33:21. > :33:24.making. There is a little bit in there about that. It is about an
:33:24. > :33:28.conversation with an amazing man. You are absolutely right about that.
:33:28. > :33:35.This is a summary of Iranian cinema, from inside somebody's living room.
:33:35. > :33:41.The film that he has made has all the customary structures, the refer
:33:41. > :33:50.relation quality, it is always reminding you this is a film, and
:33:50. > :33:56.ending with an epi phanic moment. You have this sense of if I never
:33:56. > :34:01.get out of the room you will know what I mean? I'm an Iranian film
:34:01. > :34:04.virgin, I didn't know all the references. I thought it was one of
:34:04. > :34:14.the most brilliant things I have seen in a long time. The honesty
:34:14. > :34:18.
:34:18. > :34:22.and stowism of this man, who finds out -- -- stoicim of this man who
:34:22. > :34:26.finds he can't make films any more. The doorbell, when it rings you
:34:26. > :34:29.don't know, when the man takes the trash you think who are you, I have
:34:30. > :34:34.never seen you before, you think this is a spy, you build up a sense
:34:34. > :34:37.of real fear in the film? It raises certain questions about who you are
:34:37. > :34:42.looking at, you are conscious that his flat is beautiful and he has
:34:42. > :34:45.lots of culture, he's worried about not making art films any more.
:34:45. > :34:50.There is part of you asking what is going on in the real world. There
:34:50. > :34:54.is that as well, which I'm sure he's conscious of. It service to
:34:54. > :35:00.remind us that when people in the west are most concerned about
:35:00. > :35:05.Iran's nuke clear ambitions, Iran is a quite different place to the
:35:05. > :35:15.place that, the reductive attitude towards Iran. It does suggest, in a
:35:15. > :35:20.way we would like to see it as a last hur ra to some extent. Hurrah
:35:20. > :35:24.to some extent. The regime can't stop you being a writer or a
:35:24. > :35:29.musician, you can always still write. People can stop you being a
:35:29. > :35:33.film maker. That is what the film is about. This individual man has
:35:33. > :35:38.an urge, and he will reach for anything. Now with the technology
:35:38. > :35:42.that he can get out on to the balcony with the iPhone and make a
:35:43. > :35:46.film. Although it is slightly constructed, he meets the beautiful
:35:46. > :35:50.fascinating man who collects the trash and makes the film about him.
:35:50. > :35:54.There is the extraordinary shot of the big picture window, and against
:35:54. > :35:59.the light are all the flowers, then there is cranes doing a dance
:35:59. > :36:02.outside, which either speak to a huge document in Iran, or this idea
:36:02. > :36:07.that so many different things wraching him. That was one of the
:36:07. > :36:11.most sinister things in the whole film -- watching him. That was one
:36:11. > :36:18.of the most sinister things in the whole film. When you look at a film
:36:18. > :36:22.like Carnage, shot in one room with Kate Winslet, it is much more
:36:22. > :36:26.arresting? It is real life. It was incredibly well constructed, it was
:36:26. > :36:31.shot in ten days and played as real time, there is an element of
:36:31. > :36:35.construct, and the moments where he uses different cameras. It is
:36:35. > :36:41.carefully plotted. I think it is smarter than it pretend to be,
:36:41. > :36:46.people showing up at different moments and the dog, is construct
:36:46. > :36:50.jif. Is it disingenious? No, all the way through he questions the
:36:50. > :36:54.voracity, sits down and does that several times, as any good Iranian
:36:54. > :36:57.film director should. It is part of the work. Do you think, though, I
:36:58. > :37:04.suppose the answer for him will be yes, my heart was in my mouth, I
:37:04. > :37:09.thought is he taking a terrible risk. He has family, he's already
:37:09. > :37:14.incarcerated, he's watched all the time. It is a two-fringeered salute,
:37:14. > :37:17.he gets it smuggled out in a birthday cake. He would have had a
:37:17. > :37:24.tremendous amount of support from the European film industry, not
:37:24. > :37:28.where he is, to be honest. Iranian sin pla has a status within the
:37:28. > :37:33.rest -- cinema has a status within Europe and the world is it is where
:37:33. > :37:37.it is. He will always be able to get the director of the Cannes Film
:37:37. > :37:42.Festival to write letters for him. It won't sort his life out but it
:37:42. > :37:46.does help. What made it electric for me to watch as a viewer, was
:37:46. > :37:52.supporting him or encouraging him, or was I complicit in something
:37:52. > :37:57.that will impress son him, ultimately. Was I encouraging him
:37:57. > :38:03.to commit a crime -- impress son him ultimately. Was I encouraging
:38:03. > :38:05.him to commit a crime or not. He has consigned himself to
:38:05. > :38:09.incarceration. This is something that is still happening now, when
:38:09. > :38:19.you watch the film, this is this man's life. From one respected film
:38:19. > :38:22.maker to another now, there are a few more few more refound than the
:38:22. > :38:25.German auteur, Werner Herzog. We talkeded about his book focusing on
:38:26. > :38:32.a triple homicide. What was fascinating for me was the nature
:38:32. > :38:35.of the crime. Very disquieting for me. Bank robbery, you understand,
:38:35. > :38:39.and other crimes you would understand. But this triple
:38:39. > :38:43.homicide had all the ingredients of something completely and utter low
:38:43. > :38:53.senseless. It is not just about the two murders, and it is not about
:38:53. > :38:58.the death penalty. It is about a true genuine American Gothic.
:38:58. > :39:02.dad died ten days ago. REPORTER: You are scheduled for execution in
:39:02. > :39:06.only eight days. Yes, Sir. How are you doing? I'm a Christian, I
:39:06. > :39:11.believe that paradise awaits, one way or the other, I tell people all
:39:11. > :39:16.the time, I'm either going home or home. He says I'm going home or
:39:16. > :39:23.home. Which means I'm going either to God, home into paradise, or I'm
:39:23. > :39:28.going home to my family. It is understandable in a way. At
:39:28. > :39:33.the same time he didn't have any remorse, it was not in this young
:39:33. > :39:38.man. REPORTER: I have the feeling that desanyone knee, in a way, has
:39:38. > :39:43.dealt -- destiny has, in a way, dealt you a very bad deck of cards,
:39:43. > :39:47.it does not exonerate you, I talk to you, it does not necessarily
:39:47. > :39:51.mean I have to like you. executions were the law, I was
:39:51. > :39:56.going to make sure it was done professionally, with integrity. I
:39:56. > :40:04.was a professional in capital punishment. We have to take the
:40:04. > :40:09.fact that after 125 executions, and he performs his 125th or so, it is
:40:09. > :40:16.a woman, he goes back to work, and two days later, in his workshop, in
:40:16. > :40:26.his garage, he has a breakdown. after all this, and until this day,
:40:26. > :40:27.
:40:27. > :40:30.11 years later, no, sir, nobody has the right to tell you to take
:40:30. > :40:37.another life, I don't care if it is the law. It is so easy to change
:40:37. > :40:40.the law. Werner Herzog with Into the Abyss.
:40:40. > :40:44.Death row twice in one show. Hopefully it won't give you too
:40:44. > :40:47.many nightmares, many thanks to my guests tonight, Hannah McGill,
:40:47. > :40:50.Matthew Sweet and Mark Ravenhill, they will be carefully studying
:40:50. > :40:55.your tweets and comments in the Green Room shortly. Remember you
:40:55. > :40:58.can see more about tonight's items on the website, and explore the
:40:58. > :41:03.treasure trove of material we put up there for your viewing. Next
:41:03. > :41:06.week we have a break for Easter, fear not matter that is back on
:41:06. > :41:16.April 13th. Another of the brilliant young artists performing
:41:16. > :41:26.as part of our partnership with spw. BC introducing, here is RAMS'
:41:26. > :41:33.
:41:33. > :41:36.# You got preens # You got clothes
:41:36. > :41:39.# Clear arms # Has gots the pocket radio
:41:39. > :41:42.# You got style # You got soul
:41:42. > :41:46.# Something new # And maybe something you stole
:41:46. > :41:51.# You good preens # You got clothes
:41:51. > :41:56.# Did you make it on your own # Tell me when
:41:56. > :42:00.# You think # You've gone too far
:42:00. > :42:05.# You got results # Got the faults
:42:05. > :42:13.# Got them all # The ephemeral
:42:13. > :42:18.# You got the say nothing at all # I seen a change
:42:18. > :42:23.# You got far # I seen it written in a bolt
:42:23. > :42:33.# Of a car # The new clothes
:42:33. > :42:52.
:42:52. > :42:59.# You got results # Got the faults
:42:59. > :43:09.# Got them all # The ephemeral
:43:09. > :43:18.
:43:18. > :43:20.# You got the to say nothing at all # You got results
:43:21. > :43:27.# Got faults # Got them all
:43:27. > :43:31.# The ephemeral # You got the cold
:43:31. > :43:34.# But say nothing at all # You got results