Can You Hear Me, Major Thom?

LOLA (Andrew Legge, 2022/2023)

Last year's Deadstream proved that no matter how passé first person/found footage films have become, a winner can still be produced today. Andrew Legge's forewarning from a dystopian timeline, LOLA (2023) shot on 16mm Bolex, is the latest film to follow suit.

Set in the late 1930s and 1940s, Legge's low budget, high concept, sci-fi feature is about a pair of orphaned and self-sufficient sisters, Thomasina (Emma Appleton) and Martha (Stephanie Martini) Hanbury, who build LOLA (named after their mother), a machine that is able to receive radio and television signals from the future. They become fans of David Bowie's music and eke out a living by visiting the bookies. With the onset of  World War II, the Hanbury sisters can't remain idly silent and opt to warn the public the times and locations of the Blitz bombings. With the accuracy of these prophetic reports, they become known as the Portabello Angel and soon draw the attention of the British Army.

Under coercion, LOLA becomes even more integral in aiding the British war effort. However, the continuous tampering with the future causes a butterfly effect that reshapes the rest of the twentieth century. So long, David Bowie, Bob Dylan and Stanley Kubrick! And hello, fascist popstar Reginald Watson! The miraculous invention proves to have other devastating consequences in the current timeline, too; a morally questionable decision made by Thomasina (commonly referred to as Thom throughout the film) results with the US withdrawing from the Allied powers. Further to this disaster, the over reliance of LOLA causes the Nazis to feed false information; leaving the port of Dover undefended against in the invasion. With the Germans marching through England, the sisters are branded as traitors. Martha (nicknamed Mars), goes on the lam and attempts to right the wrongs her and her sister have committed. She films a message in the vain attempt for it to be received by LOLA at an earlier point in time to end the nightmare.

This is the type of time paradox related sci-fi that greatly appeals to me. All the more impressive are the doctored newsreels embodying the alternate timeline, edited with the sisters' home movies in pushing the story. These tidbits, which are peppered throughout are the reason why the film feels so mesmerising. It's a similar effect to the the vintage docu-news reels from Zelig (1983) and Forrest Gump (1994). There are also small nuances like the sisters' language, dress style and behaviour being more modern and out of sync with 1940s England. Way less enthused about the latter, however. I can accept the constant cursing and Thom's blokish appearance, but does the viewer really need to watch Mars taking a piss while standing?

While LOLA ought to be applauded for its technical proficiency, the film's writing is somewhat wanting. The releationship between Thom and Mars doesn't give the impression that they're siblings. At times they act like a lesbian couple; which is very evident with them both sharing a bath together. Not exactly sisterly, is it? There's also Mars becoming romantically involved with a British army officer called Sebastian (Rory Fleck Byrne), which strains the relationship between the two sisters. Oddly enough, Thom seems to act like a jealous ex lover at times. The issue with the writing doesn't stop there sadly, as the finale culminates with a ridiculous rescue that reminded me of the castle scenes from Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade (1989). It might have worked on a big budget, all-star adventure flick helmed by Steven Spielberg back in the day, but on a more cerebral, grainy looking, sci-fi drama made today, it comes across as rather cringeworthy. This tarnishes the film, in my opinion. Thankfully, LOLA gets back on the right track with its poignant final message; even though the Kubrick hommage ending (you'll know it when you see it) is a tad heavy-handed.

Legge's debut feature is an extension of a similarly themed, short film narrated by Jeremy Irons, The Chronoscope (2009). The twenty minute featurette, featuring fake historian talking heads, is a more amusing take on alternate history compared to his debut feature. Much prefer LOLA over it, however. Regardless of its already listed flaws, the gravitas of such a real and monsterous evil actually conquering the world will always be a terrifying concept. For this reason alone, LOLA resonates hard with me.

LOLA ultimately depends on your appreciation for alternative timeline films. As evident with the gold standard set by Kevin Brownlow and Andrew Mollo's It Happened Here (1964), the concept is hardly a new one, but it's a theme that I've found equally fascinating and disturbing; therefore, I'm more likely to overlook its various glaring faults to a certain degree. To think, if a bit more care was spent in it avoiding some typical fanfic levels of writing, which is at odds with some seriously impressive effort everywhere else, LOLA might very well have been one of the best British films in recent years. Still a very good film, regardless.